Joint Astronomy Centre
Show document only
JAC Home
JCMT
UKIRT
Contact info
JAC Divisions
OMP
Outreach
Seminars
Staff-only Wiki
Weather
Web Cameras
____________________

JCMT home
Telescope
Pointing
CIT6 - uncertainty in its position


CIT6 - uncertainty in its position


Pointing on CIT6 during Nov 2001 caused some consternation. The fault report as it stood on 08 Nov is reported in full here.

CIT6 is a.k.a. RW LMi, IRC+30219, AFGL 1403.

Its positions are quoted variously as :

Source
R.A
Dec
Eq.
Notes
JCMT catalog
ver.1
10 13 10.7
30 49 17  
RB1950
original
source
unclear
JCMT catalog
ver.2000
10 16 02.0
30 34 19.01
RJ2000
presumably
after
precession
Carlstrom et al
1988
AJ 100, 213
10 13 10.942
        +0.012
30 49 16.75
        + 0.15
RB1950
Hat Creek. Interfr.
HCN maser
epoch 1988.11
No p.m.'s
available
Carlstrom et al
10 16 02.29
30 34 18.8
RJ2000
precessed
from above
Neri et al
1993
A&AS 130, 1
10 16 02.34
        +0.03
30 34 18.3
        + 0.6
RJ2000
IRAM interfr.
JCMT
10 16 02.05
30 34 19.0
RJ2000
re-precessed
from
JCMT 1950
value

[ Gezari et al 1993, NASA Ref. Publ. 1294 "Catalog of Infrared Observations" list other (RB 1950) positions. ]

The current (J2000) coordinates being used at JCMT are odd in their apparent coarseness in RA and specificity in Dec. However, inaccurate precession is not the cause of any error. It is unclear at this stage where our 1950 coordinates came from, but the precessed-to-2000 version seems to suffer some typographical contraction, and it would seem prudent to adopt the interferometric measures in preference.

The fixed difference in (RA,Dec) between the (coarse) JCMT position and the Carlstrom position generates the (az,el) error pattern shown below :

It resembles the transit effect although is of an amplitude somewhat smaller than that observed Nov 04 & 05. However, it seems reasonable to conclude that an erroneous position of the magnitude suggested in the table above is substantially the cause of these recent events.

The behaviour on 05/06 May 2001 was described in the fault report as tolerable. Actually, CIT6 is deviant by about 7" in elevation on the 05th in the sense seen above (my mitsake). On the 06th one measurement of two was made at a time when the errors would be small anyhow, and the other, if corrected according to the curves above, would still not seem too deviant in the context of the other systematics pervading these data.

08 Nov 2001The JCMT catalog entry for CIT6 is updated to reflect the Carlstom coordinates.

The precision (and accuracy) of other sources in our catalog - particularly the 'spectral line' sources - will be examined soon, although at first glance none seems so egregious as CIT6.


Iain Coulson
09 Nov 2001
Contact: Iain Coulson. Updated: Sat Nov 6 18:00:32 HST 2004

Return to top ^