From: <Chris.Phillips_at_email.protected>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 21:13:09 +1000

Hi Richard,

>I don't see any mention of bandwidth. Will Gbps and better be possible with > the current design? That is important, and may not be included (as who'd put > 512 MHz bandwidth at 300 MHz?).

300 MHz instantaneous bandwidth, dual pol (maximum for VLBI. As there is no plan for the (a) VLBI backend the actual bandwidth may be less than this).

>OH masers -> masers (in this case I am not sure -- what other L-band
>masers as observed in VLBI? There are molecular lines, but these
>usually resolve.)

OH masers really are the only L-band masers. There are some 800 MHz methanol transitions but I cannot think much would be done with them. Non-masing molecules will not have the brightness temperature for VLBI.

>Rather than extending the frequency up to 2.4GHz to cover Ceduna,
>extend up to cover all the (global) geodetic antennae -- including the
>new AUSGeo ones.

This is not going to happen. There is talk about going up to 10 GHz. But this would be a different instrument - probably a major upgrade in a few years.

Cheers
Chris
Received on 2007-04-13 21:13:27