> > I agree with all of Gary's points regarding the new parameters table. > But it addresses only one category of science an LSST could undertake. > Some science drivers don't need IR, some are more sensitive to surface > brightness, and others are very sensitive to the exposure time. I > suggest modifying SNAP either into two columns with Optical and IR > explicitly listed or at least say for example 0.34 + 0.34 etc if one > column. We should be listing three figures of merit, and explain them > as we now do in the caption: etendue, etendue/arcsec^2 (as now), and > etendue/(arcsec^2 * exposure time). The exposure time could be either > what is currently planned or the time to reach the sky limit. > Finally, we should be using effective aperture (including secondary > obscuration) for each facility. The whole issue of figures of merit, and which are the appropriate ones, is a rather involved one. My suggestion is that we remove the current FOM line from the table (rather than adding several others), and adding lines for etendue and for suggested exposure time. For Pan-STARRS, I am quoting http://pan-starrs.ifa.hawaii.edu/public/widefield/survey_strategies.html for a ~30 second exposure time (depending on filter). Correct? Also, Nick, what is the effective aperture (including obscuration) of the Pan-STARRS telescope? Is it indeed 1.8m? Thanks, Michael LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST Mailing List Server LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST This is message 235 in the lsst-general archive, URL LSST http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~dss/LSST/lsst-general/msg.235.html LSST http://www.astro.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/LSSTmailinglists.pl/show_subscription?list=lsst-general LSST The index is at http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~dss/LSST/lsst-general/INDEX.html LSST To join/leave the list, send mail to lsst-request@astro.princeton.edu LSST To post a message, mail it to lsst-general@astro.princeton.edu LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST LSST