[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: alignment
- From: Michael Gutzwiller <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:08:01 -0400
- Old-Return-Path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Organization: D&M Electronics
- Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:10:12 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-From: email@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"nB5oWB.A.EvE.YAg_z"@kani.wwa.com>
- Resent-Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Now that is an interesting suggestion - thanks, Tom! However,
> when looking at Tom's raw images that were posted to Storm, I
> never saw what I considered to be 'flare' (I did see flare in the
> early I images posted by Michael R). The psf changed in
> declination, but I attributed that to the VCO rate, since it is
> only correct for one declination zone, and therefore the images
> should be elongated in RA at the extremum and to some extent in
> declination as well (for drift scan, those images not at the
> proper tracking rate will look like bannanas). Mike G. has
> certainly looked at more images than I have.
The flare is minor and is visible only for bright stars. Also you won't
really notice it's flare until you look for the peak of a bright star
and notice it's not in the center of the white blob.
The edge to edge error induced by the tracking difference between 0
degrees and 3 degrees is only 0.1 percent or half a pixel and would be
mostly in the RA direction.
> You wrote:
> > A misalignment would also explain why the PSF's are asymetric.
> > That is they flare to one side.
> To which side do they flare?
The do flare in declination. I'll try to get some definitive info