🔍

Science Highlight

 

 

More...
news!

Known Issues

Known Issues affecting the Cycle 6 release of the ALMA Observing Tool

The following table lists those issues which are known to affect the Cycle 6 version of the Observing Tool. This will be updated to denote whether an issue has been fixed and whether this fix has made it into an updated release.

IssueDescriptionResolved?Deployed?
C1_032 Leaving the OT open for days at a time can cause an error upon saving. Saving to another file, closing the OT and re-opening produces a "ZLIB input stream" error i.e. the project is unreadable. This issue is yet to be satisfactorily characterised.
C2_009 Placing spectral windows that are exactly as far apart as they can possibly be can cause an error, the text of which is also misleading.
C6_001 The OT's mosaicing algorithm will not allow an even number of pointings along a single row. A custom mosaic may be used instead.
C6_002 The time-estimate dialogue shows the incorrect desired sensitivity if a value in kelvins is combined with a range of angular resolutions. The times, however, are calculated correctly.
C6_003 It is not possible to create mosaics with >100 pointings at Band 9 if Walsh switching is enabled. Single continuum is therefore always affected.
C6_004 Time estimates for spectral scans are being overestimated if the bandwidth is set to a 'User' value in velocity units. Therefore, all PIs should enter bandwidths in frequency. This issue will be fixed after the proposal deadline such that the correct time estimates are available during proposal review even if a velocity bandwidth was entered. Yes u1
C6_005 Full polarization projects that ask for multiple visits can show a negative calibration time. This does not necessarily cause the total time estimate to be incorrect.
C6_006 Time estimates can change after each validation. Yes u1
C6_007 The Maximum Recoverable Scale was being miscalculated for sources with Galactic coordinates and thus the determination of how many configurations were required could be wrong. Yes u2