Telescope+Letter+2+ICS16TOR

Dear Luke S. Walker,

I believe that the Semi-Wide Field should be the best ranked telescope because it is ranked 2 in the resolution category and 2 in field of view. This telescope should also be first because of its spectrograph range and max viewing time. It is not the first ranked in max viewing time, but it is number 3. Its max lifespan isn't very long, but that isn't the most important thing. Its resolution is the second best ranked, which means you get a very clear view. Its field of view is also the second best, which means that you can see very wide. It doesn't take very long to focus, but it also doesn't have much time to view. This is good because you still get a good amount of time to view it. The second telescope should be Massive Duration. Its resolution is the worst of all the telescopes, but it has a very long viewing time. The field of view isn't very big, and it can't see very far, but it has the longest max viewing time out of all. It only takes a couple minutes to focus, so that leaves a good amount of time to collect data. The resolution shouldn't be a problem because you can view it for very long. That means that you have more than enough time to make out what the telescope is showing. The third telescope should be Wide Field-1. Its resolution is very good at 0.05. This means the image is very clear, letting you see a lot. The spectrograph range isn't the best, but the field of view is the biggest. This means you may see very wide, but not very far. This is good for this telescope because of it's great resolution. It takes 10 minutes to focus,, which is a long time because you may only view it for 30 minutes. The fourth telescope should be the Precision Spectroscope. The resolution isn't very good at the fourth ranked, but the spectrograph range is good. The field of view isn't the best, but it still allows you to see very far because of the spectrograph range. It doesn't take very long to focus, and the viewing time isn't very long. This means that you have just enough time to collect data. The max lifespan isn't long, but that category isn't vital to the ranking of the telescope. The fifth telescope should be the High Resolution-5 telescope. Even though its resolution is the best, the max viewing time is only 25 minutes. With the 7 minutes it takes to focus, you are left with 18 minutes to collect data. That is not enough time at all, I believe. The field of view is very small, and the spectrograph range isn't very good. I believe that the capabilities of this telescope aren't very good. That is why I put this one as last. The sixth telescope should be the Advanced Spectroscope. Its resolution is almost the worst out of all, which means you will not be able to see the image very clearly. But, the spectrograph range is the best, allowing you to see very far. The field of view is the worst, so you cannot see very wide at all. This combined with the bad resolution makes this telescope be ranked lowly. It doesn't take very long to focus, but you cannot view it for very long either. The max lifespan is the third best, so it can live for a long time. The seventh telescope should be the Target Acquisition. Its resolution is not good at 0.07, so the image from the telescope won't be clear. The field of view is good, but the spectrograph range is not. This means that you cannot see very far, but you may see wide. Combined with the bad resolution, this telescope doesn't have very good capabilities. It takes 7 minutes to focus, which is a lot longer than some telescopes, and you may only view it for 45 minutes. With the bad resolution, you will not be able to collect much data. The eighth ranked telescope should be the Extended Time. Its resolution is 0.10, which is very bad. But, the max viewing time is 120 minutes. Yes, that leaves a lot of time to collect data, but the focus time is 15 minutes. That is longer than any of these telescopes in the time to focus category. The field of view is average, so you have a wide look through the telescope. The spectrograph range is good, but combined with the time to focus, bad resolution, and overall capabilities of this telescope, I believe that it should be ranked last despite my previous thoughts.

Sincerely ICS16TOR