Since the Cycle 2 Call for Proposals on October 24, 2013, there have been a number of items of potential interest to proposers which are not completely clarified in the main call materials. These items may affect how users write their proposals or set up their observations in the OT. We will collect them here as they are identified, so check back often.
- OT patch deployed Nov 18. See Science Portal News item
- List of OT "Known Issues"
- KB article: "Why do I get an error when I try to determine the time estimate using "User Defined Calibration" using the Cycle 2 OT?"
- KB article: "Why does the OT time estimate stop decreasing as I ask for progressively lower sensitivity?"
- KB article: "The time estimate for an observation of a Solar System Object is higher using the defaults than when I enter the source's expected position. Why is this, and what can I do?"
- KB article: "If I observe a predictable phenomenon, is my project considered time constrained?"
- KB article: "In spectral scan mode, is there any overlap between the frequency tunings generated by the OT? Will all tunings be observed in a single SB?"
- KB article: "For ACA observations, may I decline the Total Power observations in order to reduce the total time of my proposal?"
- KB article: "How can I query the calibrator database that ALMA uses?"
- KB article: "Why must I justify data rates higher than 12 MB/s in my Technical Justification?"
- Clarification: All sources in a Science Goal must either use "Custom Mosaic" or "Pointing Pattern: Offset", not a mixture of the two.