1 / 8

Chandra Director’s Office

Chandra Director’s Office. Proposal Cycle 9 661 submitted proposals *5.5 oversubscribed (based on time) 48 LP, 10 VLP Fewer LPs cf Cycle 8 (72) 52 Archive, 42 Theory. Gratings Proposals. Total Time Request. Change from Cycle 8 Time request down: 9% LP request down 35%

durin
Download Presentation

Chandra Director’s Office

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 9 • 661 submitted proposals • *5.5 oversubscribed (based on time) • 48 LP, 10 VLP • Fewer LPs cf Cycle 8 (72) • 52 Archive, 42 Theory ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

  2. Gratings Proposals ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

  3. Total Time Request • Change from Cycle 8 • Time request down: 9% • LP request down 35% • VLP request up 35% ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

  4. Oversubscription by Category • LP over-subscription closer to other categories ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

  5. Joint Chandra Proposals to other Observatories Joint Proposals • XMM TAC: 3 approved, in ObsCat • HST TAC: 3 (of 12) approved, PIs contacted (1 Chandra joint withdrawn) • Spitzer: 8 submitted, TAC: 16-19 April ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

  6. Constrained Time • Constraints classified for first time • Aim to allowfor level of difficulty • Separate quotas for each, based on previous cycles • Definitions given in CfP • Questions • Clarification of table needed • Questions on complex proposals, some to MP directly ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

  7. Peer Review • 18-22 June 2007, Hilton, Logan Airport • 12 topical panels, 1 Big Project Panel (BPP) • Program as last year: Tues, Wed: topical panels, Thurs, Frid: BPP (with initial organization session Wed evening) • Changes from last year: • Constrained targets: keep track of constraints in various categories • NASA requires formal list of conflicts and their resolution, our software keeps track but need to make the list official ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

  8. Response to October 2006 CUC Report • Optional Chips: • web page linked from RPS help and from relevant Proposal Threads. • Description in Section 6.19.1 of the POG ACIS chapter • Internal and External Cross-Calibration: Herman discussed work since launch • Chips rewrite: Jonathan summarized reasons and status • Sherpa User Interface: Jonathan described status and User Interface plans • Chandra Source Catalog: Jonathan discussed status and schedule • Education and Public Outreach: Kathy gave status report • Extremely Large Projects (ELPs): Harvey reported on review of white papers ChandraUsers’ Committee, 25-26 Apr 2007 Chandra Director’s Office

More Related