The Users' Committee met in Tucson on 5 and 6 January 2000. This report was prepared by Committee members:
|
Two additional members, Jill Bechtold (University of Arizona) and David Turnshek (University of Pittsburgh) were not able to attend this meeting.
The Users' Committee was delighted to hear the presentations from NOAO senior management which outlined a new strategic vision for NOAO, one that sees NOAO as an integral part of the entire US national optical/infrared astronomical enterprise. We wholeheartedly support the concept of a US national observatory whose primary role is one of leadership on issues of importance to the entire US optical/infrared community, including the private observatories. To function in this way NOAO must work with and complement the private observatories, so as to make a comprehensive system of expertise and facilities that will continue to support the most outstanding optical/infrared astronomical research in the world. This includes taking leadership in eliciting the best ideas of the entire community in planning new telescopes and developing new instruments.
The Committee believes this role also includes development of technologies and techniques that benefit the entire optical/infrared community, especially those that are too large and require too much in financial or expertise resources for private observatories and university groups to carry out on their own. We particularly emphasize a key ingredient that is required if this "new NOAO" vision is to succeed: NOAO must collaborate with private observatories and university groups in developing these technologies and techniques, including development of instruments for NOAO, Gemini, SOAR, and WIYN.
The Users' Committee hastens to add that scientific and technical leadership in US optical/infrared astronomy requires high scientific and technical reputation and achievement. These are essential if the private observatories and university groups are to be persuaded to adopt this vision. We believe such leadership requires that NOAO scientific staff have adequate time to pursue personal scientific research using the instrumental and observatory facilities they support and help to develop.
Having said this, the Committee emphasizes that NOAO also has a fundamental responsibility to support telescopes. Realizing that the current NOAO is over-committed, we do wish to stress that the restructured NOAO should build on NOAO's unique strengths: US access to Gemini, CTIO, the 4-meter Mayall and Blanco telescopes with dedicated wide-field instruments, SOAR, and WIYN.
The final general comment the Users' Committee wishes to add, in its enthusiastic endorsement of the vision articulated for a new NOAO, is that this vision requires a corresponding practical plan, one that brings about a rapid cultural change within NOAO and that makes the US community aware of this cultural change. We did not see such a plan, but we hope one is in fact in development. In particular, we believe NOAO is already over-committed in a number of areas, and to implement the proposed vision will require some restructuring of NOAO and bringing in people with new and different skills. We encourage NOAO to "clear the decks" in completing present commitments so it can move rapidly to the new roles of leadership and partnership with the entire US optical/infrared astronomy community.
The Users' Committee has separated its report into two sections, the first dealing with near-term issues, "The Present," and the second addressing plans for "The Future."
Over the past two decades there has been significant investment (most notably by, but not limited to, NASA and NRAO) in the archiving of observations and the software tools that make these archives accessible and useful to the entire user community. The community finds great value in these archives, and astronomical research has benefited significantly by the development of accessible, useful archives.
These publicly available archives have been labeled the "National Virtual Observatory" (NVO) and, while the name is new, the archives are not. For the most part, NOAO has not been a major contributor to the development of archival databases or the software that makes them useful. With the decision to dedicate a fraction of observing time to survey programs, NOAO has changed its stance and made a commitment to actively engage in this activity. This decision was strongly endorsed by last year's Users' Committee and again by this year's Committee.
However, the Users' Committee feels that progress on this activity has been disappointing. Specifically, the logical goal of having a publicly accessible archive of MOSAIC observations (from the surveys in the first instance, but ultimately for all MOSAIC observations in the longer term) has not yet been achieved. The success of the Surveys Program, in terms of scientific achievement and in acceptance by the community, is critically dependent on the timely delivery of all Survey Program observations in an accessible, useful archive. We recommend that this goal should have a very high priority within the next twelve months at NOAO.
The Committee notes that Todd Boroson will be taking the lead on managing this effort and we see this as a very positive step. We also endorse the decision essentially to adopt "off the shelf" tools for constructing the archive.
NOAO also presented plans for developing software tools that enhance the NVO ("data mining tools"). The Users' Committee recognizes merit in development of these tools and the importance of NOAO participation in determining the future plans for the NVO. However, we are unanimous in our opinion that all NOAO efforts in the near term should be concentrated on contributing to the NVO through the addition of accessible, useful archives. When NOAO has fulfilled the obligations outlined below in producing proper archives from existing surveys using NOAO facilities, then will be the time to discuss development of data-mining tools.
In short, when the Users' Committee meets next year, we hope to hear from NOAO about scientific results from outside teams using data from the Deep-Wide Survey.
The Users' Committee commends NOAO for its experiment with time allocation for large surveys in the Survey Program. As the over-subscription makes very clear, there is strong support in the community for this mode of observing. Although it is too soon to evaluate the scientific success of the Program, or whether 20% is the appropriate fraction of time allocated for this mode of observing, we support the continuation of the experiment. We do note, however, that the Survey Program places additional requirements on the NOAO staff. Specifically, it requires that:
The Users' Committee recognizes that the large volume of data associated with surveys places an additional burden on the survey observers. The committee is concerned that, as currently structured, only well-financed teams are in a position to apply for NOAO time under the Survey Program. We request that NOAO develop mechanisms to enable less well funded groups to conduct surveys.
The Committee reviewed the proposals to commit NOAO time in support of SIRTF Legacy and Chandra Cycle 2 programs.
The SIRTF Legacy proposal envisions up to 10% of all NOAO time (including Gemini telescopes) for approximately two years beginning with the 2001 Spring semester. This time is to be distributed uniformly with respect to time of year and lunar phase, and will be allocated by the SIRTF Legacy TAC with NOAO input on technical matters.
The Users' Committee supports NOAO participation in the SIRTF Legacy program, especially in view of the fact that it encourages rapid and widespread community response to a unique scientific database. However we do have some concerns, particularly about how NOAO has handled participation in this program.
Although the scientific case for NOAO direct support of SIRTF Legacy programs is strong and the requirement that data acquired be made available promptly to the public is admirable, the Users' Committee is concerned that there was apparently no external review of this potentially large commitment of NOAO time. (We note that such reviews and User Committee involvement did precede the decision to implement the Survey Program.) Indeed, it is not obvious that the SIRTF Legacy commitment was widely reviewed inside NOAO. The benefits of open discussion prior to a firm commitment should be obvious to an NOAO that is seeking wider support within the astronomical community.
The Users' Committee noted that the SIRTF TAC would grant time on NOAO telescopes (subject to the limit set in the agreement). We are concerned that, in allocating all of the agreed time, SIRTF Legacy programs of lesser quality and urgency than standard PI programs may be granted time. It does not seem reasonable that the community's involvement in the SIRTF TAC process, through NOAO, will be limited to provision of technical comments.
A similar proposal was discussed for NOAO support of large programs in the Chandra Cycle2. This was also proposed for a level of 10% of NOAO telescope time, excluding Gemini time, and would begin in Fall 2000 and run through the Spring 2002 semester. The Committee recognizes the scientific case for complementary X-ray and optical/infrared observations. Additionally, we recognize the merits of broadening NOAO's constituency to include high-energy astrophysicists who previously may not have had direct experience in ground-based observing.
The Committee's concerns regarding the Chandra Cycle 2 proposal are similar to those for the SIRTF program, but exacerbated in this case. Perhaps most significant is the fact that the Chandra program is not a legacy database open to the entire community. The Chandra proposal does not ensure that the TAC which awards Chandra and NOAO time would have anyone with optical/infrared expertise as a member. We recognize that capable X-ray observers may be unfamiliar with optical/infrared telescopes and techniques, making queue observing an attractive option, but this is a mode not presently implemented by NOAO. There will also be a need for Target-of-Opportunity observations, another mode not (routinely) implemented at NOAO. We therefore see the Chandra proposal as requiring substantial NOAO personnel resources, offered gratis, while NOAO already has an over-committed staff with a number of projects behind schedule.
In light of these concerns, the Committee recommends that:
Select committees be formed to review both the SIRTF and the Chandra proposals. If the committees deem either of these to be of high priority, then
NOAO explore obtaining additional resources from SIRTF and/or Chandra CXC on ways to compensate NOAO and its users for the time ceded to SIRTF and/or Chandra and for the expense of running queue and Target-of-Opportunity observations.
NOAO explore why proposals for the SIRTF/Chandra programs cannot be reviewed by the NOAO TAC. Because we do not understand why this cannot be done, we urge NOAO to explore this option, rather than giving the SIRTF and Chandra TACs time on NOAO telescopes up to some pre-defined limit. It hardly needs to be added that NOAO should inform the optical/infrared community of this possible use of NOAO time, since it will reduce the time available for standard PI observing programs.
More generally, the Committee is deeply concerned by the erosion of NOAO telescope time available to individual observers. If to the 20% allocated to Surveys were added 10% for SIRTF and 10% for Chandra, for the next several years there would be no more than 60% of the time available for open competition by individual observers. It is the unanimous opinion of the Users' Committee that this small a fraction is unacceptable. We recommend that any pre-allocation of NOAO telescope time should leave on the order of 75% of the telescope time available for open competition.
The Mayall and Blanco 4-meter telescopes should still be regarded as the jewels in the crown of NOAO. The Users' Committee is particularly pleased with the results of work on improving the image quality of both these telescopes, firstly by the CTIO staff and more recently at KPNO.
Of particular significance is the fact that these two telescopes were built with focal planes to accommodate 8 x 10 inch2 photographic plates, giving them unique wide-field capability in the panoply of US telescopes. Innovations in detector technology have now ushered in a new era of discovery using such wide fields: phenomena spanning large angles, rare object detection, and finding rare events. One recent example is the evidence for an accelerating universe, based on imaging supernovae with a mosaic of CCDs. The wide-field capabilities of these two telescopes are unique among public and private observatories, and will remain so for the next few years.
The Users' Committee endorses the emphasis on wide-field astronomy that NOAO has committed to these telescopes: the MOSAIC and Hydra instruments, and the survey programs that will add value to their prime science. We emphasize that the full scientific potential will be achieved when data from these are archived in a user accessible database. We encourage NOAO to maintain the highest delivered image quality and instrument and telescope performance for these unique US facilities, and to fulfill its commitments to produce the corresponding data archives.
The WIYN telescope has been supporting queue-scheduled observing for several years now and the efforts of the NOAO staff have resulted in a significant payoff: the scientific advantages and disadvantages of queue observing and the associated operational problems are now much better understood. The scientific benefits are now clear, the problem of dealing with observers' expectations has been recognized, and the strategies for optimal use of queue observing have been defined. Thus, the "experiment" with queue observing has been successfully completed.
Future support of queue observing on the WIYN is unlikely to produce additional insights into the values of queue observing; therefore, the decision to continue supporting this opportunity should be judged solely on a cost/benefit analysis of the scientific yield. The benefits of queue observing are threefold: the ability to take advantage of optimal observing conditions, the enabling of synoptic and other time-constrained programs, and the ability to follow through on the commitment to complete the most highly ranked programs. Overall, it appears that, while queue observing is certainly not a significantly less productive use of telescope time, it is also not a dramatically more productive use of telescope time. The main value of queue observing lies in the alternative opportunities that it provides.
Thus, recognizing the severe limitations on the current level of support available within NOAO, the Users' Committee recommends that WIYN-queue observing not be continued at this time.
The Users' Committee would like to emphasize that the experiment with the WIYN queue is an example of the type of investigation of astronomical techniques that the National Observatory can perform which benefits the entire community. In order to realize the full benefits of the experiment, NOAO should rapidly complete the following measures:
It is clear that a timely and successful completion of the Gemini Near-Infrared Spectrograph (GNIRS) must remain the top priority for NOAO instrument development. Secondly, priority should be given to expeditiously finishing instruments currently in the queue such as SQIID and the WIYN tip/tilt.
Proposals for two new starts were presented to the Users' Committee--NGOS and NEWFIRM. NGOS is a high-efficiency, wide-field (20-40 arcmin), multi-slit optical spectrograph. The high efficiency is based on volume-phase holographic grating technology at least partly developed at NOAO. NGOS appeared to have a well thought-out role in the measurement artillery of NOAO observatories. In this context the Users' Committee was a bit disappointed that, having seen this project presented at the meeting a year ago, it is not further along. The Committee recommends that NGOS be given the top priority of these two projects. Although no schedule was proposed, we recommend that NGOS be brought to a Conceptual Design Review promptly.
The Committee found that the case for NEWFIRM, a 4K x 4K wide-field (30 x 30 arcmin2) infrared imager, while interesting, is less compelling than NGOS. (We note that this concept was presented to the Users' Committee last year and little appears to have been done since, which emphasizes again the over-commitment of NOAO staff and the need for collaborative work on instrumentation.) We do appreciate that such an instrument is a logical follow-up to the recommendations from the Supporting Capabilities Workshop, but NGOS is also, and in our judgment NGOS should be given top priority.
The Committee noted that all new or planned instruments are anticipated for Kitt Peak. We appreciate that CTIO has received Hydra II and MOSAIC II lately, but it is not clear why new cutting-edge instruments always seem to go to Kitt Peak in their first incarnations. We question whether the Instrumentation Program Advisory Committee is really functioning as intended, i.e., to implement balanced instrument development programs for both sites.
Finally, the Committee notes that the instrumentation program presented was entirely in the context of the old way of doing business, viz., Tucson instrumentalists developing instruments for NOAO telescopes. We emphasize that the strategic vision outlined in the Introduction to this report would suggest that NOAO foster collaborations and partnerships with other groups to help in design and development of new instruments such as NGOS and NEWFIRM. If NOAO is to fulfill its role as a strategic leader and facilitator for all of US optical/infrared astronomy, it is essential that such collaborations become the default method of doing business. This will also help to get new instruments developed quickly.
The Users' Committee commends the exemplary leadership shown by Todd Boroson in managing the US Gemini Project Office (USGPO) over the past few years. In many ways the vision and style he has demonstrated anticipated the vision outlined for the "New NOAO" discussed throughout the Users' Committee meeting. We heartily endorse the appointment of Bob Schommer as his replacement and congratulate NOAO management in appointing talented members from its staff in both Tucson and La Serena for such responsibilities.
The Committee endorses the broad outlines of the plan proposed for supporting the US community in its use of the Gemini Observatory and it agrees that making Gemini a resounding scientific success for the US community should be the top priority for NOAO in the near term. The identification of NOAO "mirror" support astronomers for each instrument makes good sense, and the Committee feels that it is essential to use Science Verification commissioning time (or any other means) as soon as possible to get each of these people out to Hawaii to observe using the instruments they will support. Early use of the Gemini instruments for a variety of observations, followed by the associated data reduction and calibration, will enable the mirror astronomers to properly support the US community in achieving rapid success with Gemini.
The Committee discussed the question of establishing a Gemini "Observing Center" in Tucson probably longer than was warranted; after all, the resources to establish and maintain it are probably not large. However, there was a consensus that to achieve the best and most efficient use of Gemini, at least at the outset, requires that US "classical observers" go to Hawaii and Chile and learn firsthand the subtleties of Gemini observing, by working with the Gemini support staff directly.
The Committee does believe that it would be most valuable if US astronomers were able to use Gemini to obtain optical or infrared "snapshots" of objects they are working with in other spectral regions. It was not clear whether this requires creating a US queue mode to supplement the Gemini queue, and whether this US queue would be facilitated by having a Tucson-based control center, rather than having the US observer(s) for the queue working from Hilo or La Serena; we suggest these practical implementation issues are best left to the USGPO. However, we do note that support of a US snapshot mode will require significant resources if the data are to be reduced and presented to users in the way to which the US community has become accustomed in the case of Hubble Space Telescope snapshots.
The Committee was asked to consider a US queue-observing program using the University of Hawaii Adaptive Optics system on Gemini North. We believe this is an ideal "snapshot" mode; however, this AO system cannot be run remotely at present. If it were to be operated from a putative Tucson-based control center, this would require some man-months of software effort and the assistance of Gemini and University of Hawaii personnel (that we believe would be forthcoming).
The Committee is unanimously opposed to committing substantial effort by the IRAF group to developing software to analyze adaptive optics data. Instead, we suggest that effort should go to investigating adaptive optics data reduction packages developed and used at other observatories such as the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope and at ESO.
The Committee also discussed the question of loaning CRSP to Gemini on an interim basis to provide some near-infrared spectroscopic capability in the near term. We suggest that IRS might be a much better instrument for this role, since it is cross-dispersed and has higher spectral resolution, although it only covers the 1-2.5 µm spectral region.
Because the staffing level at CTIO is rather lean, and new demands on staff time are emerging with the advent of Gemini South and SOAR, the Users' Committee was asked to provide its view on balancing priorities at CTIO. At the outset the Committee wishes to reaffirm a general principle that applies to the scientific staff throughout all of NOAO: The best way to ensure that the performance of observatories (i.e., telescopes, instruments, and services) is optimized, is that the support staff use those facilities regularly to carry out independent, front-line personal research. In addition, we emphasize that scientific leadership requires scientific credibility. If NOAO is to carry out the leadership role envisioned in the Introduction to this report, the staff must be seen to be doing noteworthy personal research.
In the particular case of CTIO, the Users' Committee is concerned that a potentially high turnover rate of technical and scientific staff to other observatories could jeopardize the operation and instrumental support of the 4-m and 1.5-m telescopes. We recommend that AURA review personnel compensation policies that introduce inequities between CTIO and other southern observatories, and introduce some mitigation. Such inequities could otherwise result in CTIO staff being lured away. In a similar vein, it seems to us that CTIO staff is especially lean and is less able of coping with a hiring freeze than some other parts of NOAO.
The Users' Committee recommends that CTIO vigorously pursue operational and staffing strategies to build on the unique capabilities of the Blanco telescope for wide-field optical/infrared imaging, and multi-object spectroscopy. We certainly do not want to see effort diverted from the Blanco 4-m tip/tilt system.
The Users' Committee recommends that CTIO pursue acquisition of a commercial AO system (as part of the NOAO cost-sharing agreement with the SOAR consortium), and design a work-package schedule that guarantees delivery of a debugged and fully functional system by SOAR first light. Natural guide star AO is a solved problem, and in a context of very lean staffing, it would be far more cost-effective to buy such a system.
The Users' Committee regrets that operational pressures may lead to the curtailed use and/or closure of the smaller telescopes at CTIO. These facilities currently provide the US astronomical community with unique observing opportunities. We recommend that CTIO explore possible collaborative operation of these facilities (e.g., university groups, NASA, or private consortia) that would reduce direct operational costs and minimize impact on the Observatory staff workloads.
The Users' Committee appreciates the modest efforts of the CTIO staff to provide expertise in the ongoing site evaluation of Pachón and Tololo, as well as sites within the Chajnantor area. However, we see these activities at the bottom of the priority list. The unique strength of CTIO, and therefore highest priority, is the Blanco telescope. Its wide field and aperture give it an absolutely vital role in US and international astronomy.
Telescope development has undergone a revolution in recent years with a number of 6-10 m telescopes appearing at various sites north and south. These facilities all tend to emphasize high angular resolution over relatively narrow fields. The advent of these new facilities emphasizes the need of all astronomers, including those working at the private observatories, for a new wide-field telescope of larger aperture than the 4-m Blanco and Mayall telescopes. These 4-m telescopes were built over 20 years ago, with 1 arcsec delivered image quality (DIQ) as a goal. Technology now exists that would allow a factor of fifty increase in throughput over the current 4-m telescopes/cameras in a new 7-m class, 3-degree-field telescope. Moreover, the DIQ would improve by at least a factor of two, as demonstrated in smaller new-technology telescopes. The combination would yield an improvement in time-to-limiting-flux of over 100.
Deep wide-field probes of the universe will produce qualitatively new science; moreover such surveys will provide critical input to the efficient use of the narrow-field 8-10 m telescopes. In particular, such surveys would provide the large sample of Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs) required to make a major step forward in understanding how the Solar System formed, and it would also provide the census of potentially devastating Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) needed to understand how such objects have affected the evolution of life on Earth, as well as the potential threat to Earth from impact by a large NEO. These same data could reveal faint transient events, including the optical counterparts of Gamma-Ray Bursters, and reveal new supernovae. Wide-field weak-lensing shear observations would lead to a direct test of the foundations of cosmology.
Technological advances also make such a telescope now feasible. Recent advances in large detector array fabrication and efficient processing and analysis of terabyte databases in near real-time promise efficient data collection and dissemination.
The Users' Committee believes there is community-wide interest in such a facility, interest that cuts across subdisciplines and private vs. public institutional interests. We see such a project as a key first step in the transformation of US optical/infrared astronomy into the genuinely national enterprise envisioned in the Introduction to this report. The Committee recommends that NOAO begin leading national effort on this cornerstone facility by organizing a workshop that brings together the ideas of the entire community for discussion and identification of technological issues.
A new generation of large ground-based telescopes is being studied worldwide. As is described in the Introduction to this report, the Committee sees NOAO as the natural focus for a broad US community effort directed at developing the next generation of large ground-based telescopes. The Committee commends the efforts of the NOAO Planning and Development Office in pursuing this project, but we note that all the people presently working on this concept are either from NOAO or Gemini, with the sole exception of Larry Ramsey. This is obviously not the way to garner the best ideas and catalyze the broad US astronomical community. We recognize that such a facility is many years away and that NOAO staff have more urgent commitments to fulfill. However, it is a given that this project will require a long development time, and almost certainly will demand participation in an international collaboration. It is critical that in the US we begin to think about such a project, whether it be a large single dish or an interferometric array. We encourage NOAO to continue at a low level of staff effort to work with the entire US community in developing and analyzing ideas for such a project.
Both the increasing pressure on NOAO resources and the increasing complexity of new instruments demand that NOAO move away from its traditional model of developing all its instrumentation from scratch in-house. The Committee endorses the proposed new way of doing business in that NOAO works closely with and forms partnerships with the national community to instrument its telescopes and others. NOAO must also play a central role in helping to coordinate instrument development for the broader astronomical community to minimize costly duplication of facilities. Only by working in partnership will NOAO and the broader US community be able to maximize the scientific impact of its facilities and instrument program.
More generally, the National Observatory is the best place to lead well-focused research and development efforts to develop new technology that will be needed for the next generation of large instruments. NOAO has done this in the development of InSb detectors and new grating technology, which will continue to benefit the entire astronomical community. The Committee envisions collaborations and possibly outright grants to university groups to develop new technology for astronomy. We encourage NOAO to develop this role as a national resource in technology and techniques that benefit the entire US astronomical community.
One of the most important missions of scientists today is to promote public understanding and support of science in the US. Astronomy has a unique role in doing this: more than any other discipline, astronomy has the ability to capture the public's imagination and motivate students to pursue careers in science. NOAO is to be commended for its efforts in education and public outreach (EPO). Its creative initiatives are models for programs around the country. In particular, the Research Based Science Education (RBSE) program is a model for science outreach. The 0.9-m telescope's wide-field nova patrol of the Andromeda galaxy has captured the attention of high school students around the country. We urge that this program continue; the small amount of resources it requires is well worth the effort.
More generally, the Committee encourages NOAO to see itself as a resource center for all optical/infrared astronomical EPO efforts in the US. The National Observatory is the logical organization to serve in this role. We envision the EPO section of NOAO as the place to which astronomers would turn for advice with their own EPO efforts and guidance toward resources available. Strengthening the EPO efforts of the community in this way cannot help but improve the visibility of NOAO and the NSF, and in the long run will lead to a stronger scientific base for astronomy and the Nation.