You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I need to investigate why the thread's author thought that that's necessary. I think that MARX should to that itself by accessing the telD1999-07-23aimptsN0002.fits file (it's part of the MARX distribution), so this step should not be necessary. If it is, it's a bug in MARX that I need to investigate. Note that for future observations improved thermal modelling will most likely allow mission planning to aim at the nominal aimpoint again and correct for the drift in the observation planning already. There is a memo about that, but I cannot find it right now.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The thread http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/threads/marx_sim/ claims that the DY_AVG and DZ_AVG header keywords are supposed to be used in the computation of DetOffset inputs to MARX.
I need to investigate why the thread's author thought that that's necessary. I think that MARX should to that itself by accessing the
telD1999-07-23aimptsN0002.fits
file (it's part of the MARX distribution), so this step should not be necessary. If it is, it's a bug in MARX that I need to investigate. Note that for future observations improved thermal modelling will most likely allow mission planning to aim at the nominal aimpoint again and correct for the drift in the observation planning already. There is a memo about that, but I cannot find it right now.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: