Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:07:09.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Performance of a small array of Imaging Air Cherenkov Telescopes sited in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 September 2022

Simon Lee Open the ORCID record for Simon Lee [Opens in a new window] ,
Sabrina Einecke ,
Gavin Rowell ,
Csaba Balazs ,
Jose A. Bellido ,
Shi Dai ,
Dominik Elsässer ,
Miroslav Filipović ,
Violet M. Harvey  and
Padric McGee
...Show all authors
Simon Lee*
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia
Sabrina Einecke
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia
Gavin Rowell
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia
Csaba Balazs
Affiliation:
School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne VIC 3800, Australia
Jose A. Bellido
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia
Shi Dai
Affiliation:
School of Science, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith NSW 2751, Australia
Dominik Elsässer
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, 44221 Dortmund, Germany
Miroslav Filipović
Affiliation:
School of Science, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith NSW 2751, Australia
Violet M. Harvey
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia
Padric McGee
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia
Wolfgang Rhode
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, 44221 Dortmund, Germany
Steven Tingay
Affiliation:
International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia
Martin White
Affiliation:
School of Physical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia
*
Corresponding author: Simon Lee, email: simon.lee@adelaide.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As TeV gamma-ray astronomy progresses into the era of the Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA), there is a desire for the capacity to instantaneously follow up on transient phenomena and continuously monitor gamma-ray flux at energies above $10^{12}\,\mathrm{eV}$ . To this end, a worldwide network of Imaging Air Cherenkov Telescopes (IACTs) is required to provide triggers for CTA observations and complementary continuous monitoring. An IACT array sited in Australia would contribute significant coverage of the Southern Hemisphere sky. Here, we investigate the suitability of a small IACT array and how different design factors influence its performance. Monte Carlo simulations were produced based on the Small-Sized Telescope (SST) and Medium-Sized Telescope (MST) designs from CTA. Angular resolution improved with larger baseline distances up to 277 m between telescopes, and energy thresholds were lower at 1 000 m altitude than at 0 m. The ${\sim} 300\,\mathrm{GeV}$ energy threshold of MSTs proved more suitable for observing transients than the ${\sim}1.2\,\mathrm{TeV}$ threshold of SSTs. An array of four MSTs at 1 000 m was estimated to give a 5.7 $\sigma$ detection of an RS Ophiuchi-like nova eruption from a 4-h observation. We conclude that an array of four MST-class IACTs at an Australian site would ideally complement the capabilities of CTA.

Keywords

Cherenkov telescopescosmic raysgamma raysIACT techniqueMonte Carlo simulations
Type
Research Article
Information
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , Volume 39 , 2022 , e041
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Astronomical Society of Australia

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdollahi, S., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 34Google Scholar
Ajello, M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 861, 85Google Scholar
Albert, J., et al. 2008, NIMPA, 588, 424Google Scholar
Albert, A., et al. 2019, astro_ph, 1902.08429Google Scholar
Alken, P., et al. 2021, EP&S, 73Google Scholar
Armstrong, P., et al. 1999, ExA, 9, 51 Google Scholar
Atwood, W., et al. 2013, 4th IFS, IFS2012 Google Scholar
Backes, M., et al. 2009, PoS, ICRC2009 Google Scholar
Bernlöhr, K. 2008, ApH, 30, 149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Consortium, CTA 2018, Science with the Cherenkov Telescope Array. World Scientific, doi:10.1142/10986 Google Scholar
Observatory, CTA, Consortium, CTA 2021, CTAO Instrument Response Functions - prod5 version v0.1, doi:10.5281/ZENODO.5499840 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, R. W., et al. 1989, PASA, 8, 41 Google Scholar
Colin, P., et al. 2007, JPhConf, 60, 303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enomoto, R., et al. 2002, ApH, 16, 235 Google Scholar
Fermi-LAT Collaboration, 2021a, Fermi-LAT Monitored Source List Light Curves, https://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/data/access/lat/msl_lc/ Google Scholar
Fermi-LAT Collaboration 2021b, ATel, 14845 Google Scholar
Filipović, M. D., & Tothill, N. F. H., 2021, Principles of Multimessenger Astronomy. IOP Publishing, doi:10.1088/2514-3433/ac087e Google Scholar
Franckowiak, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A120Google Scholar
Collaboration, H.E.S.S. 2021a, Science, 372, 1081Google Scholar
Collaboration, H.E.S.S. 2021b, ATel, 14857 Google Scholar
Collaboration, H.E.S.S. 2022, astro_ph, 2202.08201Google Scholar
Hassan, T., et al. 2017, ApH, 93, 76Google Scholar
Heck, D., et al. 1998, CORSIKA: A Monte Carlo code to simulate extensive air showers. Karlsruhe, doi:10.5445/IR/270043064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillas, A. M. 1985, PoS, ICRC1985, 445 Google Scholar
Holler, M., et al. 2015, PoS, ICRC2015 Google Scholar
Hooper, D., & Linden, T. 2018, Phys. Rev. D, 98, 083009Google Scholar
IceCube Collaboration, et al. 2018, Science, 361Google Scholar
Inoue, Y., et al. 2013, ApJ, 768, 197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, S., et al. 2007, PASA, 24, 174Google Scholar
Kifune, T. 2001, AIP Conf. Proc., 558Google Scholar
Kosack, K., et al. 2021, cta-observatory/ctapipe: v0.10.5, doi:10.5281/ZENODO.4581045 Google Scholar
Li, T. P., & Ma, Y. Q. 1983, ApJ, 272, 317 Google Scholar
López-Coto, R., et al. 2016, JINST, 11, P04005Google Scholar
Lorenz, E. 2005, 4th AiD:SuP, AiD2005 Google Scholar
Collaboration, MAGIC 2019, Nature, 575, 455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collaboration, MAGIC 2020, ApJ, 908, 90Google Scholar
Collaboration, MAGIC 2022, astro_ph, 2202.07681Google Scholar
Mukai, K. 2021, Koji’s List of Recent Galactic Novae, https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Koji.Mukai/novae/novae.html Google Scholar
Nöthe, M., et al. 2019, aict-tools, https://github.com/seinecke/aict-tools Google Scholar
Plyasheshnikov, A. V., et al. 2000, JPhG, 26, 183 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowell, G., et al. 2008, NIMPA, 588, 48 Google Scholar
Ruhe, T., et al. 2019, EPJ Web Conf., 207, 03002Google Scholar
Sergijenko, O., et al. 2021, PoS, ICRC2021, 975Google Scholar
Sikora, M., et al. 1997, ApJ, 484, 108Google Scholar
Stamatescu, V., et al. 2011, ApH, 34, 886Google Scholar
Tridon, D. B., et al. 2010, NIMPA, 623, 437 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veres, P., et al. 2019, Nature, 575, 459Google Scholar
Wang, Z., et al. 2018, ExA, 45, 363Google Scholar
Yoshikoshi, T. 2005, WTNACD2005, pp 359–371 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, B. 2018, The Physics of Gamma-Ray Bursts. Cambridge University Press, doi:10.1017/9781139226530 Google Scholar