\section{Proposed Observation Strategies}

\ldots {\bf PRODUCE A PLOT WITH THE OVERLAP BETWEEN SWIFT AND MAGIC-- Markus Garcz. } \ldots

\ldots {\bf PRODUCE PLOT WITH ESTIMATION OF MAX. ZENITH ANGLE DEP. ON GAMMA-RAY HORIZON } \ldots

\ldots {\bf SIMULATE BURTS AND TRIGGER THEM WITH SWIFT AND MAGIC } \ldots

\subsection{What to do with the AMC ? }

\ldots {\bf MARKUS G. } \ldots

\subsection{What to do with moon shine ? }

\ldots {\bf NICOLA, HV TABLES, LIDS ... -- CAMERA EXPERTS - ECKART, RAZMIK, MANEL, JOSE} \ldots

\subsection{Calibration }

\ldots {\bf MARKUS gAUG} \ldots

\subsection{Maximizing the duty cycle}

\begin{verbatim}
email Nicola Galante: \\
\\
I calculated duty-cycle with a Sun zenith angle greater 
than 105 deg, which means that Sun must be at least 15 deg below 
horizon, and not with an angle of 115 deg. I tried this calculation also 
with a limit of 108 deg, because a lot of people assume that the 
astronomical sunset is when the Sun is 18 deg below horizon. Using this 
assumption the calculated duty-cycle decreases of about 4\%(from 1.225 to 
1.18 srad per year or from 9.75\% to 9.36\% vs 4pi srad per year). Anyway 
the definition of astronomical sunset influence the main cut on duty-cycle.
About wind I can say that the data I used were provided by NOT, which is 
situated in a place more windy than where MAGIC is growing up. I made 
the calculation also with other upper limits to wind's speed then the 
usual 10 m/s, and we can gain quite a lot of duty-cycle (even about 
1.5\%more vs 4pi srad per year) so it should be interesting to test the 
telescope during some windy or foggy days.
\end{verbatim}

\subsection{In case of follow-up: Next steps}

Analysis during day:
\par
If some significance is seen, observe the same position next night to get some OFF-data.


