At the end of the next decade, at least a dozen telescopes with apertures in the range 6.5-m and larger will be in operation. It may be an exaggeration to say that this is the greatest advance in capabilities in groundbased O/IR astronomy since Galileo looked at the sky with his first telescope - but it is not much of an overstatement. Given this remarkable change, it is inevitable that what NOAO offers to the community will evolve as well. There are several articles in this Newsletter describing this evolution; especially important are the summary prepared by Lee Anne Willson describing the workshops on small telescopes in Toronto and Flagstaff and the report of the joint CTIO/KPNO Users' Committee.
It is appropriate here to review where we have been and where we are going. The following tables summarize the facilities that were offered at NOAO in 1984, the year in which NOAO was officially established, and those that the community will access through applications to NOAO in the year 2000.
Capabilities - North
1984 2000
4-m Mayall 8-m Gemini (0.425)
2.1-m 4-m Mayall
1.3-m 3.5-m WIYN (0.4)
Coudé Feed 2.4-m
0.9-m 9-m HET (0.07)
0.9-m 6.5-m MMT (0.07)
Burrell-Schmidt (1/4)
No. of Nights: 2281 No. of Nights: 1082
No. of nights x (D)2: 9056 No. of nights x (D)2: 22315
D = Diameter
Capabilities - South
1984 2000
4-m Blanco 8-m Gemini (0.45)
1.5-m 4-m Blanco
1.0-m (Yale) 4-m SOAR (0.3)
0.9-m 2.4-m
Curtis-Schmidt (Mich.)
No. of Nights: 1460 (est.) No. of Nights: 1004
No. of nights x (D)2: 7264 No. of nights x (D)2: 18925
D = Diameter
Note that only one telescope in each hemisphere is common to both lists - the 4-m Mayall at Kitt Peak and the 4-m Blanco at CTIO. The next article discusses the plan for completing the transition from where we are now to where we want to be in the year 2000.
Given the mix of telescopes listed above, the key issue to be addressed by NOAO and the community that uses these facilities is how to use the telescopes most effectively. As the tables show, the number of nights available to users will be reduced by about one-third in the south and by a factor of two in the north, while the number of photons gathered will increase by about a factor of 2.5 because of the increase in aperture. If one takes into account the advances in detector technology and the advent of fiber spectroscopy, then the throughput for certain types of observations is literally orders of magnitude higher now than it was in 1984. As the report of the users' committee emphasizes, a night is still a useful quantum of measurement, and it is likely that fewer nights will mean fewer users. However, the changes in the number of telescopes being operated need not mean 50 percent fewer users if we learn how to use this suite of instruments more effectively than is possible with traditional methods of scheduling and operation.
Two things make the NOAO telescopes unique - the first is public access. The second, however, is that NOAO is the only observatory that offers access to a balanced suite of telescopes in both hemispheres with a range of apertures and a diverse complement of instruments for both optical and infrared astronomy. In order to realize the full scientific advantage of this range of capabilities, we need to treat the facilities accessed through NOAO as an observing system, not simply as individual telescopes. Observers should be able to apply to pursue scientific programs using optimal observing strategies, which may make use of telescopes of a range of apertures in either or both hemispheres.
The basic idea is that in the future, there should be "one-stop shopping" for observing - one Web address that provides links to all the information on how to use the instruments and prepare observing proposals, one application form, and one deadline for proposals. To first order, observers should not be concerned where the telescopes are located (so long as the object is observable from that latitude) or who operates them.
In order to begin moving toward one-stop shopping, NOAO has consolidated the responsibility for working with the users before and after observing runs under the US Gemini Program, which is headed by Todd Boroson. The USGP was already charged with this responsibility for US users of Gemini. The international Gemini project supports observers only from "sea level to sea level," that is, while they are actually at the observatory making observations. The national project offices are responsible for assisting with proposal preparation, for evaluating proposals, and for assisting with data reduction. The USGP will now provide this same service for CTIO, KPNO, and the open access to the Hobby-Eberly telescope, the upgraded MMT, and any other independent observatories that make time available to the community as part of their instrument proposals to the NSF. The directors of CTIO and KPNO, like the director of the international Gemini project, will be responsible for providing scientific leadership for their sites, including recruiting scientific staff, scheduling the telescopes, supporting observers, upgrading the telescopes, and developing the long range plans for instrumentation.
This assignment of responsibilities to the USGP is the first step toward reorganizing NOAO along functional lines. The goal is to streamline the organization and minimize duplication at the various sites.
The Observatories Council, which oversees the operation of NOAO on behalf of AURA, has endorsed this concept. Specifically, at their most recent meeting they recommended that in the next two years (and sooner if possible), we consolidate all responsibility for external user support, including US support of Gemini, as well as operation of Kitt Peak under a single associate director, with a second associate director being assigned responsibility for the joint CTIO-KPNO instrumentation program. Prior to the onset of Gemini operations, they approved an interim arrangement whereby the position of Director of Kitt Peak would be combined with the position of Deputy Director of NOAO and head of the joint instrumentation program.
I am very pleased that Richard Green has agreed to serve in this triple role and will be responsible for all of the activities of KPNO. He will also be responsible for overseeing all of the engineering and technical staff in Tucson and on Kitt Peak (apart from those assigned to NSO), and can easily make the trades among ongoing programs. Bruce Bohannan will continue to serve as Assistant Director of Kitt Peak, with the major responsibility for mountain operations.
KPNO is clearly central to our plans for the future. While much of the focus recently has been on the downsizing of the observatory, too little emphasis has been placed on how powerful an observatory this is - and will continue to be in the year 2000. The image quality of the 4-m Mayall telescope has been improved to a median that is approaching one arcsecond, and there are significant improvements in the thermal environment still to be made. The WIYN continues to perform well, and the partners have just agreed to make a one time investment over the next two years with the goal of improving the reliability and efficiency of operations. Two major new instruments - Phoenix and the mosaic CCD imager - are being commissioned. I am confident that Richard Green will provide the leadership and vision required to ensure that KPNO remains competitive well into the next century.
As their report elsewhere in this Newsletter indicates, the joint CTIO/KPNO Users' Committee endorsed this short term reorganization of NOAO. They recognized that it has been impossible, and is likely to continue to be impossible, to recruit someone from either outside or within NOAO to accept the KPNO directorship while the observatory is in transition unless the position is combined with another activity within NOAO that offers more opportunity for new programs and significant initiatives. Once KPNO reaches a new and stable equilibrium, the users would prefer to have again a separate director for Kitt Peak. This recommendation differs from the views of the OC. Also from my own point of view I believe that there is some merit in reducing the number of directors by one, as we have now done, just as we are reducing staff in every other area of the observatory. After all, in 1980 the KPNO director was in charge of what has now splintered into KPNO, the USGP, NSO/Tucson, the nighttime instrumentation program, and NOAO with its central offices, each with its own director, and the budget for those activities has been reduced by close to 40 percent. I would hope that four directors rather than five would be enough to handle what one did a decade ago. In any case, during the next two years, we will be analyzing options with both the OC and the users' committee for how best to manage the nighttime program when Gemini becomes operational.
Even more important than reducing costs, this reorganization of NOAO along functional lines emphasizes the integration of similar activities across multiple sites. From the standpoint of the nighttime users, we wish to become the National Optical Astronomy Observatory, offering a powerful observing system to the community, rather than the National Optical Astronomy Observatories, as we are now, operating separate and distinct sites. This transition toward more unified support of the user community will occur gradually over the next several years, and we need your help and advice in making this transition. One-stop shopping for observing time is a very attractive idea, but making it work will be a challenge. How do we coordinate observing time at multiple sites in two hemispheres? How do we go about evaluating proposals that make use of more than one facility? What level of coordination of activities across sites is appropriate and when does such coordination stifle initiative and slow decisions? We are just beginning to discuss these ideas within NOAO and with the users. Send your comments and suggestions to any of the directors - Todd Boroson, Richard Green, Malcolm Smith or to me.
Sidney C. Wolff