TTA Tools Status. JeffKern summarized the status of the TTA tools and gave a brief demo of the UI. Some discussion items.
Capabilities: A VLA Conintuum capability was shown in the demo where the user inputs an rms sensitivity. Other capabilities will be created to accommodate different types of observing. It was emphasized that the proposer's intent is necessary to estimate the total time and that this time can be overridden. There should be feedback to let the user know if the proposed observations are feasbile. For NRAO/GBO telescope time is allocated instead of a specified sensitivity (ala ALMA). Monitoring observations will not be a separate capability but there were be a way to specify these scheduling constraints.
Scheduling: There was some confusion over the scope of the TTA Tools. The software under development will not do telescope scheduling but we need to at least crudly simulate how the observations could be done to estimate the total time.
Proposal Handling Tool (PHT): Some concern about the requirements for the PHT part of TTA Tools. Right now the focus is on proposal creation; later work will start on the review and time allocation part.
TTA Tools Timeline: The TTA group will probably become more involved around Q1 CY2022. Right now the plan is to have a minumum viable product by late 2023, but this will likely slip based on past experience. We discussed possible ways to release TTA tools gradually. This is hard to do since the PST is decoupled from the new software. Possible scenarios are to do DDT or Sponsored proposals with the new TTA tools. But we need to deal with the different user account databases and much is done offline for Sponsored proposals.
PHT Bug. AmyMioduszewski discovered that the Decl. coordinates in the PHT are often wrong when the Decl. is above 22 deg. The PHT does not do anything with these coordinates and the PBT, which exports to the OPT, uses the PST. The prioritizer uses the LST ranges. This information is used by the scheduler. A JIRA ticket has been submtted and this ticket will be prioritized with other review items.
Large Proposal TAC Meeting. AmyMioduszewski reported that she should have the VLA info ready by Monday. The A-config. is oversubscribed, whereas the D-config. is undersubcribed. This should not effect Large proposals. She may adjust the configuration lengths.
Regular TAC Meeting. ToneyMinter and MarkClaussen reported that they should have info ready for the TAC meeting release for the GBT and VLBA, respectively.
Closed Sponsored Proposals. We briefly disucssed Sponsored proposals that closed to the public. AnandCrossley noted that this accounts for about 5-10% of the time for the GBT and less than 1% of the time on the VLBA. We had included some NSF mandated observing as closed by mistake. This brought up a broader question on how we define open-skies time. ToneyMinter defined open-skies as time paid for by the NSF. MarkClaussen felt this was too simple. If necessary we can discuss this further in a future TTA meeting.