|Proposer||(37223) Andre Kovacs (firstname.lastname@example.org) obscode: KADB|
|Assigned To||(3663) Dirk Terrell|
|Date Submitted||April 30, 2023|
Dear AAVSONet Telescope Allocation Committee,
In support to the PLATO-MERCURY-Test campaign, organized by the PLATO's Citizen Contribution to Photometric Follow-up working group, I would like to propose the observation of a transit for the exoplanet candidate TOI 4600.01, as a workbench for its ground-based follow-up work.
The candidate transiting exoplanet TOI 4600.01, detected by the TESS Mission, is a particularly interesting target for test observations for this campaign due to the following factors:
In addition, both the BSM-Hamren and BSM-NH2 are particularly suitable for these observations due to the following factors:
Finally, the observations of TOI 4600.01 would require a high cadence: having the integration time at the maximum value of 300s and also having the minimum dead time between them as low as possible, in order to achieve SNR~250 (or ~4ppt RMS) and not to impact the precision of the transit model fit to the data.
|Target||RA (H.HH)||Dec (D.DD)||Magnitude||Telescope||Observation Frequency||Expiration Date||Proprietary Term|
|TOI 4600||17.230025||64.56617||12.29–12.3||BSM_NH2||0||Oct. 31, 2023||1 Year|
Committed time series from 0400-0800 UTC in NH2. Hope for clear skies on 23-05-16! Hamren not operative. I assume your date/time calculations are correct.
Sorry for the late reply.
I am only receiving e-mail notifications when the proposal changes its state (approved, allocated), not when new comments are added to it.
The forecast for tonight doesn't look favorable for New Hampshire?
In case we succeed to observe tonight, would it be possible to retrieve the raw FITS images and the FITS calibration images used, for inspection?
The quick answer is no. Why do you really need them?
I would need the raw science and calibration FITS by request of a researcher, that uses a specific pipeline for calibration and reduction.
Unfortunately, target did not run this night. Try a new transit time. I'm going to run a few images on a single night to test exposure adequacy.
Thank you very much for your support.
I would appreciate if you could run some test exposures with increasing integration times (a couple having 20s, 40s, 60s, 80s, 100s, ..., 300s), so I could work on an exposure time calculator per target magnitude?
Unfortunately, the transits of TOI 4600.01 are pretty rare.
So, should I submit another proposal for a different target?
If you have another suitable target, the TAC would be ok with that.
You should have received 200 images from an out of transit test run last night. Give analysis a try. Lots of different issues to deal with. IMHO, seeing a transit less than 10 mmag will be tough/impossible.
Thank you very much for the test data.
Unfortunately, the seeing was very poor (~6arcsec FWHM) and varied a lot on that particular night, and the atmospheric transparency was probably not great and decreased a lot mid-session. So, the precision was much worse than that George Silvis have got before for WASP-148b (8.79 mmag depth transit and 12.04 V-mag).
Yes, using a small 7-inch telescope would require perfect observing conditions for shallow transits.
Also, it would be really helpful to observe in Clear, instead of using a photometric filter, to achieve higher precision.
Would it be possible to repeat the test, to see if we could get better results?
Comments on this proposal are closed.