deletions | additions       diff --git a/subsubsection_Survey_Speed_label_sec__.tex b/subsubsection_Survey_Speed_label_sec__.tex  index 05aa676..de8bde5 100644  --- a/subsubsection_Survey_Speed_label_sec__.tex  +++ b/subsubsection_Survey_Speed_label_sec__.tex 
...
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ombeff}  \bar{\Omega}_B= {9\over8}\,\Omega_B(\nu_0=3{\rm GHz}) \qquad\qquad \bar{\theta}_P = \sqrt{9\over8}\,\theta_P(3{\rm GHz})  \end{equation}  (this holds for any 2:1 band relative to the mid-band FWHM). Thus, for our new measured $\theta_P=$13.97^\prime$ $\theta_P=13.97^\prime$  at 3~GHz, the effective primary beam width we should use for mosaic sensitivity is $\bar{\theta}_P=$14.82^\prime$, $\bar{\theta}_P=14.82^\prime$,  which is only 1.2\% below the nominal 15$^\prime$ used originally to calculate speeds. We conclude that the survey speed need not be reduced due to the measured beam size, although for consistency we should adopt a value of \begin{equation}\label{eq:nomsurveyspeed}  SS = {\bar{\Omega}_B \over t_{calc}} = { 0.5665\,\bar{\theta}^2_P \over t_{calc}} = 23.17\,{\rm deg}^2/{rm hr}  \qquad\qqud t_{calc}=5.37{\rm s}.