Things went somewhat better and less stressful than last night, but the overall efficiency was even lower (7*20min science exposures vs 8*20min science exposures). We experienced the loss of a readout several times, including 3*20min science exposures and one or two standard star exposures. For some reason it happened only on spectral frames.
We had once a problem with a telescope executing offsets -- it turned out that the guide star was too close to the edge. Because of this it took 30min to observe a bright telluric star (see below as well).
We kept having problems with the alignment of bright standard stars -- sometimes IRAF script will just crash when the star is saturated. Then the alignment sequence has to be started from scratch (slit image).
We didn't run "klog" in the beginning of the night, so when we tried to launch it in the morning, it caught the wrong data directory (Dec/1) and there was no way to change it.
| Total Times | Time Observed | Time Engineering | Time lost technical | Time lost weather | Time lost other | Total Program Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-11-30 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 4.0 | 7.5 |
Links
[1] mailto:igor.chilingarian@cfa.harvard.edu
[2] http://www.ctio.noao.edu/noao/field-collection/field-nr-prog/41807/delete?destination=print/node/19738
[3] http://www.ctio.noao.edu/noao/field-collection/field-nr-prog/41807/edit?destination=print/node/19738
[4] http://www.ctio.noao.edu/noao/field-collection/field-nr-prog/add/node/19738?destination=print/node/19738
Formally computed efficiencies of the telescope time use including standard stars:
night1 = 37%
night2 = 33%
The real efficiency: 2 targets (one fully completed, one by 3/4) in night1, 1 target competed by 3/4 (+2 completed by 1/2). The original plan was to observe 13-14 targets = 25%