October 2018 New Horizons/Comet Review Notes SOHO SWAN Comet Water Production Rates Reviewers: Cesare Grava, Jeff Morgenthaler CG (Discussion follows) Solar flux comes from LISIRD database at LASP. inst not specified, but presumably it's soho's sumer. Not possible to reproduced derived rate because it's dependent on an assumed/modeled outflow velocity. can compare to published values. table columns not provided: assumed outflow vel (v), col density (n), brightness (i). lori: v is not constant, based on modeling. velocity calculation not included in overview, but is in other mike combi papers (not referenced here). gerbs: g and i might be useful to add confidence and reproduce results. Or we need to have the model/code reproduced in here in some way. We also need better references to the raw/calibrated data to rederive results. suggested lien: give us the parameters or supply the model as a document with this collection. Certification: Yes, data is fine, just want the model/parameters (suggestions) Emily Law: please provide context products GIOTTO C NMS 4 86P/HALLEY V1.0 Reviewer: Mark Perry (not available, sent email to Ludmilla) documentation/dataset: excellent and complete There are liens. Emily Law: Liens list sent in. New Horizons ALICE KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Cesare Grava, Jeff Morgenthaler CG: Document --> docinfo.txt mentions aareadme_bu, but it's not there. (a backup file. not necessary) --> Nh_met2utc.tab: converts MET to date (missiong time to udt) (neat, but wouldn’t it be better if they included a routine? Times are provided every 500,000 seconds…) slimindx.tab --> There are only two types of targets: “SPICA” and “CALIBRATION”. Does the latter include “Rho Leo”? It is impossible to distinguish an “HV test” from “Rho Leo”. Moreover, “Spica” is never mentioned in dataset.cat. --> -3- has the order of the spectra not in sequential (chronological) order --> alice.cat: does not mention mu69 as next target --> nh.cat: There is a reference to a missing note: 4 These mission phase dates and/or designations are still under consideration and will most likely change in future versions of this mission catalog. ds.cat (raw and calib) --> Line 83 of dataset.cat: “A list of these sequences has been provided in file DOCUMENT/SEQ_ALICE_PLUTO.TAB.” but there’s no such file… This is probably a leftover from the Pluto encounter phase. JM: wants sequence file document about how to calibrate the instrument (observe this star, ec.) because that was done for main mission, not kem. and motivation. MK: icd.pdf spells out that they observed such and such stars. team response: sure. JM: paragraph or two (in sequence file) saying, when we were pointing here, we were making this calibration, which calibration file corresponds to which activity, etc. nh: ok (maybe not just alice) --> Line 472: “The quantum efficiencies of the photocathode- coated surfaces are about an order of magnitude more sensitive to sensitive to H Lya wavelengths than the bare, uncoated MCP glass”. (repeated "sensitive to") --> Lines 55/548: “It includes functional testing during the wakeup check from hibernation, high voltage (HV) dark tests, Lyman-Alpha upstream and downstream measurements, InterPlanetary Medium (IPM) upstream and downstream measurements”. But then in line 548: “It includes Lyman-alpha Sky and Interplanetary Medium observations”. Lyman-Alpha and InterPlanetary are spelled differently. But, most of all, the Lyman-Alpha emission, too, comes from the Interplanetary medium. Maybe the team meant “Helium from Interplanetary Medium”? --> Lines 52/543: “The first Kuiper Belt cruise 1 dataset delivery for the P-Alice instrument covers the data that had been downlinked to the ground by 12/31/2017”. But then in line 543: “This data set includes data downlinked between 10/26/2016 and 12/31/2017.” Maybe the starting date could be added to the sentence in line 52. JM --> slimindx.tab: says it should 80-columns, is actually 85. Emily Law sent in liens list. separately, between pds and nh: update nh.cat and remove from kem phase datasets. Certification: Certified w/ minor liens. New Horizons LEISA KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Mike DiSanti, Adam McKay MD leisa has two resolution modes: low and high (540), and apparently this is different from before. but nothing really new happened. they're just trying to make things consistent. registration for calibration/alpha lyrae: did not work (a sinusoidal pattern). why "calibration" target? their spice pipeline for distance to target, etc. pulls the target and doesn't work on non-solar system objects. would be a pain to really change this, apparently. arcturus: stellar profile and spectral extracts: weird pattern/peak (electronic noise?) that looks odd to disanti. because point-source, weird wobbling not present with the extended objs. bottom line: navigation seems good for some of the arc obs, but the spec is affected by (likely instrumental) "noise" and (slight wobble in X). side question: will these data be used to inform the radiometric calibration for mu69? yes, in family and consistent w/ previous, so no change necessary. team: these techniques good for mu69, because it's a PS even up to 24 hours before flyby. AM agree w/ what mike said. says... change aperture and the sawtooth goes away and gives a smoother spectrum. lien: same discussion about target as calibration or vega, so it's hard to know w/o really looking into the headers/keywords what you're pointed at. team: add info to text file/catalog, because we don't want to change the keyword. have to talk to anne when she gets back for a consistent policy. response: don't want to force science/calibration on user, might be a target in the fov if calibrating, might be diagnostic/functional test. emily law liens: sample_display_direction wrong in fv? Certification: Certified w/ minor liens (label corrections, specs). Day 2 New Horizons LORRI KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Tony Farnham, Mike Kelley TF Cat Files --> ds.cat: START_TIME = 2016-10-26T23:59:59.359, STOP_TIME = 2017-12-18T23:59:59.772. But ABSTRACT_DESC = "This data set contains MVIC [or LORRI] observations taken during and downlinked between Oct. 26, 2016 and Dec. 31, 2017." Difference between phase boundary and data obtained? Response: might be downlink time vs. start/stop time as discrepancy. --> nh_kem.cat: typo in kem1 cruise phase disc: "The name and times chose for this mission phase" (chosen) Documents Dir --> docinfo.txt: orphanquote marks after references SPICE Check --> Image lbls: solar elongation is being computed incorrectly (for many files). looks like routine is using pluto shortcut of 180-x=y, which doesn't work for new targets. Values are correct in FITS headers for LORRI files, but not included in MVIC. Label Geometry --> Lbl says target-related vectors may not be meaningful w/ "N/A" but doesn't say so for extrasolar calibration objects like M7, where the values are obviously not right. --> Talks about light time and stellar aberration reflected off target, which is again obviously not the case for non-solar system targets. Data --> has a field with MU69 in frame, but can't find. Gerbs: Is it specificied in FITS header where it is? Response: Yes. Certification: Yes, just need a few minor changes to documents and lbls. MK ds.cat --> in data_set_desc, abs_desc, use full designation for asteroid the first time it's used (mu69, hz84, etc.). --> confidence level note mentions seq_lorri_pluto, but this does not exist. from our discussion yesterday. Data astrometry only has 1/10 of a degree precision, usually requires some adjustment to get right. jeff: is it systematic or random? mike: depends on how you round, which is just based on pointing. FITS header and PDS label have the same imprecision. Certification: some doc liens, but yeah. New Horizons MVIC KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Tony Farnham, Mike Kelley TF (slides 6-9 from lorri apply to mvic as well) Data --> no guidance in documentation on how to calibrate for new objects. flux from the sun should work? not clear what values should be used for calibration. pluto, charon, sun, etc. are included in headers. which do you use? probably sun. Team Response: complicated question. don't know the color. if it looks solar, use sun; if it looks red, use pluto. Gerbs: is there a phase response issue as well? tony: okay, there are issues. here's a para saying what you should probably do to resolve these issues in each case, but we're not telling you what to do in each case. team response: yeah, need guidance for user on how to use the keywords (when there's not a cited answer for the object). so go to others observations, find a color, then use the appropriate-ish one. Certification: Yes, a few minor changes to document and lbls. MK ds.cat --> same comment on first use of abbrevations as well as sequence file in confidence note. Certification: Yes New Horizons SWAP KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Rudy Frahm, Steve Joy RF Documentation --> files swap_cal.* is in DOC dir, not in SWAP subdir as said. --> swap.cat: refs to pluto that are now out of date. need to be rephrased to include kem. --> swap_cal.pdf: unknown math symbols, negative angles. --> swap_cal.pdf: include inst paper --> nh_met2utc.pdf/trajinfo.txt: update with kem mission phase --> remove pluto-only files --> index.tab: discrepancy between lvl1, lvl2, lvl3. NASA values instead of CODMAC levels? Data all good Certification: Yes right now (no one confused, there's a liens list) (minor documentation errors should be corrected). SJ --> ds.cat: line 61 - sppacecraft typo. lines 494,495: make certified for scientific use by the PDS (not TBD) (in confidence level note) --> ds.cat files literally identical between raw and calibrated. no differentiation needed? --> swap_cal: this doc is a cut and paste from the ssr paper, so there are some formatting funny issues. missing captions, numbers. Certification: Yes (with minor liens) tilden's liens: gerbs: timing discrepancies. going forwad: in last deliveries, note it in a file rather than make them redeliver. document time overlap rather than worry about it. New Horizons REX KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Frank Centinello (not available) and Dustin Buccino DB --> no dsn uplink tracking files included. why? why not documented? (directory missing, but mentioned. but the files probably aren't necessary scientifically for this dataset.) (data tnf directory) (they do have scientific value) --> rex_activities_kem...: typo, clarification of the dates of each experiment in documentation. Certification: Before cert, delta review to add documentation or those files (which will need a quick look). FC (presentation) --> might be applicable to include a spacecraft event kernel or event log along with the documentation, if one is not included in the spice packages for this time span. sek useful for thruster/pointing, but this dataset is insensitive to that because the information is elsewhere. info in spice kernels which is available. better as an event log (spreadsheet csv something) than a kernel. (suggestion to add ref where can be found.) more useful for certain instruments? probably. yes for swap, yes for dust. for rex? yes, because doppler shift. msk: rex has a flag in the ICD. note if it was ever thse case thrusters fired while observing. New Horizons PEPSSI KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Steve Joy and Rudy Frahm SJ Documentation --> nk_kem.cat: line 255, regolith misspelled. --> ds.cat: line 498, spacecrafat misspelled. line 485 (again): change to "by the PDS." --> ds.cat: identical between 2 and 3. --> pep_bti.tab has not been updated for this time period. --> nh_met2utc.tab is out of date. --> calib/calpars directory missing calibration parameters files/lbls. Data --> energy range appears to shift lower around day 300 in sectors 0-3 and bad sectors 4 and 5 are removed. the reason for change needs to be documented. (at the dataset boundary.) RF Documentation --> index files same discrepancy as SWAP. --> aareadme_bu ref should be removed. Data --> quick look spectrograms: bumps and dips in hydrogen and helium that is hard to explain. contamination from nuclear calibration source is not a good explanation. --> FLUX HDU B Rate Boxes Proton DNF: intensity in region 4 has decreased. what is going on here? --> FLUX HDU B Rate Boxes Proton UNC: values in uncertainty down also. --> FLUX HDU B Rate Boxes Proton CPS: between count rates and flux value, when bump in count, flux goes down? how? only explanation change in calibration factors, but there's no documentation saying so/explaining. pointing direction? instrumental? same story for other data. team response: at day 344/333, changed flight software and tables?. might be part of the issue, but not good documentation, clearly. for quicklook, thinks wrong channel, should be regenerated. also guesses pointing. team response peter: might be real from reg 3 to 4? okay maybe pointing. --> b09smooth object in every l3 data. what is it? which sector, start anode, detector? is it important? Certification: No, because we need an answer about what's happening from the documentation (delta review). New Horizons SDC KEM Cruise 1 Reviewers: Adrienne Dove and James Gaier AD --> ds.cat: large number of lvl2 files, seems weird. --> seen in slimindx.tab: duplicate entries from the same time. this is a problem seen in a previous review as well. not sure what problem/solution was. --> sdcram.csv: new file, not in other datasets? no references to this doc in other parts of the dataset, probably not used for l3, but should be carefully considered for analysis. team resp: important when craft was slewing a lot for pluto encounter. ancillary data --> discrepancies of lengths of time in tables in both l2, l3 across dscam, on_off_times, etc. intentional? not updated? Typos described in presentation. JG Documentation --> missing sequence file (already discussed) catalog/sdc: operational considerations --> stiulus false pos: have there been any calibrations since 7/2016? team resp: did another test that failed, not caught until later, so not entered. from september date to end of data here. --> no particle events over 3 um as of late 2016, reason under discussion: any larger particles in this data set? status of discussions? plan to address? team resp: no significant updates. investigated why no larger impacts, not oblique impacts, looking into modeling of density/vel. Data --> data were sparse, 28 hits over 92.4 hrs. expectded? then 10 w/in same MET sec all greater than 2-sigma mass. --> many hits come in clusters of many channels at same time, but quality flag OK. thruster firing makes sense as an expl, but no thruster fire if OK. --> ICD says multiple hits like this should get flagged as coincident events and removed, but that doesn't seem to be happening. team response (marcus): random vibrations might cause multiple channels to register a hit. this does happen. not sure why not removed from calibrated data. might be different flag not getting caught. 2 liens: (1) clarification in documentation of where flag/removal is supposed to happen. and then (2) actually figuring out how to implement a solution. ad: adding flag should be fine. if coincident across all channels, can't possibly be real signal. those should be thrown out? flag at least. ludmilla: if potentially real data, should be preserved. may need to add errata to archived data that says, hey, ignore data when there are multiple coincident events. Certification: No, not until issue with coincident events documented (delta review).