Note about suggestions -
Please make content-based edits in a non black color (unique, if possible).
The PHT for the VLA and VLBA provides versioning on the full set of proposals/sessions associated with a Semester call. This versioning enables the telescope schedulers to iteratively work on "modified sessions" based on recommendations of the SRP or TAC. This modification includes manual assignment of (preliminary) scheduling priorities, manual modification of sessions, and manual modification of temporal attributes. At the VLA, the Prioritizer algorithmically determines and assigns preliminary scheduling priorities to sessions. The VLBA does not have an algorithm with which to bulk process scheduling priorities. The proposals are processed together such that a final version is provided downstream.
A single pressure plot is generated for all proposals, and it lacks versioning capabilities. If changes are made to the maintenance schedule, the previous configuration of the pressure plot cannot be retrieved. Consequently, it is impossible to compare differences with reserved time definitions (time not linked with current proposals) without using external tools, such as taking a screenshot. Additionally, it is not feasible to restore a pressure plot that has no proposal pressure without restarting the entire process. Despite these limitations, the GBT PHT offers superior inspection capabilities compared to the PHT systems of the VLA and VLBA; it allows users to pinpoint the specific session impacting a part of the pressure plot.
Furthermore, the GBT PHT provides a "calendar" view that offers a daily breakdown of scheduling pressures. This feature facilitates the easy inspection and adjustment of projects with fixed dates and monitoring schedules, as well as maintenance plans.
It's important to note that the GBT PHT includes broader features that are not incorporated into the TTA Tools.
From System Description, Section 3.6.1 for the PPR Proposal Process
For the OSR Proposal Process and for a Proposal Process that supports the Auxiliary Committee, the requirements (5) and (6) apply, except for the phrase "before, during, and after the TAC".
Allocation Disposition:
Available Time Model:
We assert that these aspects are necessary for the PPR Proposal Process. We believe they align with the requirements of an OSR Proposal Process. For a Proposal Process supporting an Auxiliary Committee, a subset of these features should be identified.
Allocation Disposition:
Available Time Model: