ALMA "look and feel" requirement. The committee agreed the requirements were clear. LorantSjouwerman had some concern about the implementation of science goals. These details should be discussed. MarkClaussen had strong concerns about using ALMA as a model. It was questioned whether or not we had the expertise for ALMA on the committee. DanaBalser and LorantSjouwerman have used the ALMA OT and JeffKern has knowledge of the ALMA OT structure and processes.
VLBA in scope for SRDPs. The committee agreed the requirements were clear. MarkClaussen had very strong concerns about these goals. In particular there is no interface (equivalent VLA PBT/OPT) and thus how do you capture the necessary elements to satisfy SRDP requirements?
ALMA proposal handling not in scope. The committee agreed the requirements were clear.
Observation preparation tools. The committee agreed the requirements were clear. LorantSjouwerman asked if any other committee had been formed (no), and if it was a requirement that enough information had to be captured to generate scheduling blocks (yes). Many committee members had concerns that we were not developing the observation preparation tools in this committee or that a parallel effort was not underway. There was concern that any requirements written by this committee would need to evolve and therefore effort and time would be wasted. Others felt we should have enough expertise on the committee such that the interface between proposing/reviewing and scheduling/observing can be defined. That is, we should be able to capture the information that is necessary for any software downstream. RyanLynch thought this was doable for the GBT; here generating SRDPs in not a requirement. We briefly discussed the data flow for each telescope.
VLA. Data flows from the PST/PHT into the PBT but only the authors and source list are automatically transferred to the OPT. Other data (time allocation, resource setup, intents, calibrators, etc) have to be input by hand into the PBT, OPT and RCT. Some changes in these current tools would probably be necessary.
VLBA. There is no interface; that is, everything is done manually. There is some scheduling software that BarryClark wrote to do some dynamic scheduling. The program SCHED is used to generate control files that control the telescopes (somewhat similar to scheduling blocks).
GBT. Data flows from the PST to the GB PHT/DSS. This relies on the current structure of Sessions. There was some uncertainty whether this requires a lot of manual intervention. Since there is more fixed scheduling than in the past this requires more intervention in the DSS.
High-level Feedback. (RyanLynch had to leave early and did not respond here.)