September 2019 New Horizons Review 
==================================

LEISA KEM Cruise 1 and KEM1 Encounter Liens
===========================================

Reviewers: Mike DiSanti, Adam McKay
===================================

file: aareadme.txt
--> All are identical, contain reference to subdirectories and errata.txt that don’t exist, can these be made more dataset specific?

CATALOG

file: catalog/dataset.cat
--> Under Version, there is text that begins, "Future datasets may include more data...". I'm concerned that the data are being released when they may be potentially incomplete. Thus, are there truly future data to be added to this dataset?

MU69 Approach 31 Dec 2018
--> Bottom line: Unable to see anything, regardless of stretch.  Seems to be instrumental noise.

DATA
--> In some sequences star bounces back and forth, is this an issue?
--> No description of what data actually is (need to dig into .lbl file to figure out what the target is)

Technical Review: Tilden Barnes
===============================

DATA_SET_ID:  Should the KEM1 id not be '-X-' (for "Other") but '-A-' for "asteroid"?  Or are we stating the KBOs are other?

file: 'catalog/dataset.cat'
--> ABSTRACT_DESC: The abstracts between KEMCRUISE1 and KEM1 are almost identical, yet don't they include different things?  Most of the text makes sense for being the same, but I question if what is included is always the same.  Perhaps I'm wrong.
--> DATA_SET_DESC: The difference between KEMCRUIE1 and KEM1 are negligible.  Should that be the case of for a cruise data set and then an encounter?  The purposes and what is observed or done I would think would be different.
--> TARGET_NAME: For KEMCRUISE1, remove the MU69 since it is not a listed target in the data labels.

Certification: Certified with liens