Which range of magnitudes for layer oriented MCAO?

Layer Oriented MCAO is a promising technique attempting to perform wide field of view correction with Natural Guide Stars. In the extended concept of Multiple Field of View Layer Oriented MCAO the wavefront sensor field of view is enlarged to collect more photons from more Natural Guide Stars and, in principle, significant sky coverages at any galactic latitude are achieved using only Natural Guide Stars. In this paper we address the problem of finding the best magnitude range for the Natural Guide Stars in order to achieve the best correction with the largest sky coverage in the Layer Oriented Multiple Field of View. For a given Field of View and sky direction we consider only the Natural Guide Stars within a given brightness range and we compute the equivalent integrated magnitude. Then we correlate the contribution in sky coverage of the previously considered Natural Guide Stars and we extrapolate which is the magnitude class giving the largest sky coverage. Once identified the more suitable Natural Guide Star magnitude class we discuss the possible implications in the design of a Multiple Field of View Layer Oriented wavefront sensor and we give the order of magnitude for the main parameters, i.e., maximum number of Natural Guide Stars and detector characteristics.

[1]  J. N. Bahcall,et al.  The distribution of stars to V = 16th magnitude near the north galactic pole - Normalization, clustering properties, and counts in various bands , 1981 .

[2]  Jacques M. Beckers,et al.  Increasing the size of the isoplanatic patch with multiconjugate adaptive optics. , 1988 .

[3]  R. Ragazzoni Pupil plane wavefront sensing with an oscillating prism , 1996 .

[4]  J. Bahcall,et al.  Models for the Galaxy and the Predicted Star Counts , 1979 .

[5]  E. Fedrigo,et al.  Multiple field of view layer-oriented adaptive optics Nearly whole sky coverage on 8 m class telescopes and beyond , 2002 .

[6]  Francois Rigaut,et al.  Future of filled aperture telescopes: is a 100-m feasible? , 1998, Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation.

[7]  R. Ragazzoni,et al.  Sensitivity of a pyramidic Wave Front sensor in closed loop Adaptive Optics , 1999 .

[8]  Jacques M. Beckers,et al.  Detailed Compensation Of Atmospheric Seeing Using Multiconjugate Adaptive Optics , 1989, Defense, Security, and Sensing.

[9]  Terry S. Mast,et al.  Giant Optical Devices , 2000 .

[10]  Roberto Ragazzoni,et al.  Adaptive optics for 100-m-class telescopes: new challenges require new solutions , 2000, Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation.

[11]  E. Marchetti,et al.  Modal tomography for adaptive optics , 1999 .

[12]  J. Beckers ADAPTIVE OPTICS FOR ASTRONOMY: Principles, Performance, and Applications , 1993 .

[13]  Roberto Ragazzoni,et al.  Adaptive-optics corrections available for the whole sky , 2000, Nature.

[14]  R. Foy,et al.  Adaptive telescope with laser probe : isoplanatism and cone effect , 1990 .

[15]  B. Ellerbroek First-order performance evaluation of adaptive optics systems for atmospheric turbulence compensatio , 1994 .

[16]  Gerard Rousset,et al.  Visible wavefront sensor development. , 1987 .

[17]  Francois Rigaut,et al.  Laser guide star in adaptive optics : the tilt determination problem , 1992 .