08-11-2016, 06:21 PM
Thanks, Opihikao. In related news it does seem a decision about the TMT's final location is not far away:
http://optics.org/news/7/8/21
"In Edinburgh, Li admitted that the eventual location of the TMT could affect its precise design, given the different weather and wind conditions to be found at alternative proposed mountain-top sites in the Canary Islands, Baja Mexico, and Chile, compared with Mauna Kea."
"Dynamic Structures, which is part of the diversified steel conglomerate Empire Industries, said it expected to complete the enclosure design over the next 20 months, which suggests that the consortium is confident that the location issue will soon be resolved."
This was also published today regarding the possible site at Ladakh in India (a link to Business Standard, which seems to be an Indian newspaper):
http://goo.gl/9JvRtg
"The necessary site-specific details have been submitted to the TMT alternate site selection team. Hanle site has lower seeing values of 0.9-1.2 arc sec as compared to the alternate sites in Chile and Canary Islands of Spain (La Palma) which have seeing values of 0.55 arc sec. Thus, scientifically, Hanle has less advantageous characteristics for hosting a mega telescope like the TMT in comparison to the other alternate sites, the reply added."
That quote makes more sense if you replace the word "lower" with "poorer".
http://optics.org/news/7/8/21
"In Edinburgh, Li admitted that the eventual location of the TMT could affect its precise design, given the different weather and wind conditions to be found at alternative proposed mountain-top sites in the Canary Islands, Baja Mexico, and Chile, compared with Mauna Kea."
"Dynamic Structures, which is part of the diversified steel conglomerate Empire Industries, said it expected to complete the enclosure design over the next 20 months, which suggests that the consortium is confident that the location issue will soon be resolved."
This was also published today regarding the possible site at Ladakh in India (a link to Business Standard, which seems to be an Indian newspaper):
http://goo.gl/9JvRtg
"The necessary site-specific details have been submitted to the TMT alternate site selection team. Hanle site has lower seeing values of 0.9-1.2 arc sec as compared to the alternate sites in Chile and Canary Islands of Spain (La Palma) which have seeing values of 0.55 arc sec. Thus, scientifically, Hanle has less advantageous characteristics for hosting a mega telescope like the TMT in comparison to the other alternate sites, the reply added."
That quote makes more sense if you replace the word "lower" with "poorer".