...
And when the LAT is just scanning, can we make do with a longer interval, say 1 minute? How severe is the tradeoff in accuracy? The motivation for making the interval longer would be to make FT2 files smaller and to increase the speed of exposure calculations.
| Wiki Markup |
|---|
This is kind of a minor point, but may need to be clarified: During the time between the stop (LPASTOP) of a run and the LPASTART of the next (if a stop/start is issued outside an SAA passage - see above), the LAT will be dead as far as data taking is concerned. If a time interval is not explicitly included in an FT2 file, i.e., if the time of a START entry is not the same as the time of the previous STOP entry, we can just assume that the missing interval was dead time, right? \[anders\] Any time between an LPASTOP and the subsequent LPASTART is deadtime i.e. we did not take any data. |
2. DEADTIME column
(Digel) For reasons that I no longer recall, we originally decided to keep track of both accumulated livetime (in each 30 second interval) and accumulated deadtime (since the start of the mission). The Science Tools do not use the DEADTIME column and makeFT2 assigns the value 1-LIVETIME to the column anyway.
...