1) NOD_ON_SLIT in high-med:
in flight 288:
Callisto hi-med 396cm-1 ,Callisto hi-med 384cm-1, mu Cep hi-med 396cm-1m, mu Cep hi-med 384cm-1
NOD_PQ = 10.00" P 0.00".
A-B beam offsets of ~57 pixels.
10"/ 57 pix = 0.175 " /pix
The 10" nod value is corroborated by the sibs RA & Dec values from the housekeeping data.
in flight 159:
alpha CMa himed 1548cm-1
NOD_PQ = '5.00" P 0.00" Q'
A-B offset of ~ 30 pixels
5" / 30 pix = 0.167"/pix
in flight 158:
alpha Boo himed 1548cm-1
NOD_PQ = 6.00" P 0.00" Q
A-B offset of ~35 pix
6" / 30 pix =0.171
The plate scale is unchanged by the undistort process. Checked this by measuring the lengths of sky lines before and after distortion correction process.
2) Jupiter hi-med map at 354cm-1
https://www.dropbox.com/s/bnuryvi6zga1hp0/sumjupiter.map.fits?dl=0
I made this map by summing over part of the continuum spectrum of Jupiter (28.153423-28.171833um) and then subtracting a background created by medium combining the top 5 rows of pixels.
Measuring a diameter is tricky but I tried to get reasonable lower and upper limits by hand and found a diameter between 210-226 pixels. The JPL Horizon's website gives an angular radius of 37.6" on 2014-04-08.
37.6" / [210,226]= 0.179"/pix -- 0.166"/pix
The 4" imaging was not accounted for -- but when I simulate a 37.6" disk and blur it by a 4" PSF, it doesn't change my diameter measurement by that much.
On the "flip" side, (haha), medium mode NOD_ON_SLIT data does appear to have a ~0.2 " /pix scale
in flight 288:
IRAS 04278+2253 medium 1719.24cm-1
NOD_PQ=15.00" P 0.00" Q (corraborated by SIBS ra/dec housekeeping)
A-B separation = 74 pixels
15"/ 74 pix = 0.2027" /pix
in line-ops, 3/14/2016
file *sci.01360.fits at medium, 2142cm-1
NOD_PQ=30.00" P 0.00" Q
A-B separation: 150.6
30"/150.6 pix = 0.199 "/pix
I wonder if the origin for this difference is that the focal lengths of the hires and the cross dispersion chamber are different? Most reductions had the HRFL~100cm and the XDFL~90cm
