Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Decide on how/if to support 'SCIENCE_SC' mode (06) data #370

Open
DavidT3 opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Decide on how/if to support 'SCIENCE_SC' mode (06) data #370

DavidT3 opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
refinement If a feature has already been implemented, and works, but could do with another pass to improve it. review Review and analyse how well a feature works

Comments

@DavidT3
Copy link
Owner

DavidT3 commented Nov 18, 2024

This is part of the filtering and separation that occurs during stage 2 of the nupipeline tool - the premium quality events are demarked as 'SCIENCE' (their Obs mode) or '01' in the shorthand. Of course we shall use them.

What I'm talking about here are the 'SCIENCE_SC' events - so they'll be on-sky rather than occluded by the earth or on the calibration source, but for whatever reason the optical-bench star tracker (which is the best way of defining the aspect solution) isn't available. Thus as a backup the spacecraft bus star trackers are used, but as they are known to undergo thermal flexing, the pointing accuracy degrades to ~2 arcminutes.

So, it might possibly be useful for, say, global measurements of properties from galaxy clusters (with a suitably large region), but less so for point sources or spatially resolved analyses.

I do think that we should include support for the creation of these files, but it seems that adding them to the 01 class events like we would combine sub-exposures in XMM would be unwise.

@DavidT3 DavidT3 self-assigned this Nov 18, 2024
@DavidT3 DavidT3 converted this from a draft issue Nov 18, 2024
@DavidT3 DavidT3 added refinement If a feature has already been implemented, and works, but could do with another pass to improve it. review Review and analyse how well a feature works labels Nov 18, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
refinement If a feature has already been implemented, and works, but could do with another pass to improve it. review Review and analyse how well a feature works
Projects
Status: Backlog
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant