1 / 9

LC-ABD Phase 2 Outcome G. A. Blair, RHUL LC-ABD Meeting RHUL 12 th April 2007

LC-ABD Phase 2 Outcome G. A. Blair, RHUL LC-ABD Meeting RHUL 12 th April 2007. PPRP Meetings Feedback from PPRP Outcome. PPRP Meetings. First meeting was at RIBA, London on 5 th Sept. 06 Second meeting was at Daresbury on 11 th Oct06. Panel consisted of Jon Butterworth (Chair)

leroy
Download Presentation

LC-ABD Phase 2 Outcome G. A. Blair, RHUL LC-ABD Meeting RHUL 12 th April 2007

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. LC-ABD Phase 2 OutcomeG. A. Blair, RHULLC-ABD MeetingRHUL 12th April 2007 • PPRP Meetings • Feedback from PPRP • Outcome

  2. PPRP Meetings • First meeting was at RIBA, London on 5th Sept. 06 • Second meeting was at Daresbury on 11th Oct06. Panel consisted of Jon Butterworth (Chair) Iain Steele Steve Boyd Steve Holmes (FNAL) Daniel Schulte (CERN) Additional input from External referees ILC GDE R&D Board

  3. Beam Delivery System Crab Cavity Main LinacCavity Wakefields Beam Dumps Instrumentation and Diagnostics Fast Feedback Survey, Alignment and Stabilisation Polarised Positron Source LC-ABD programme addresses closely-connected areas • Damping Rings Energy Spectrometer Beam Quality and Stability:Luminosity Production A.Wolski

  4. LC-ABD timescale is well-aligned with GDE project timescale A.Wolski

  5. PPRP Feedback • Despite frequent requests for feedback, no official response until Science Committee met on 31st Jan 07. • We had submitted a letter to SC re-emphasizing the quality of our work and the need for a 3-year programme. • We were given one year “bridging” funds of £3M. • We were also asked to produce a 3-year programme at approximately £3M p.a., which is also in line with the PPRP priorities; details will be provided by the WP managers later.

  6. PPRP Scenarios Visiting Panel • Optimal: represents the best use of resources to maximise return, ~ 70% of original cost • Cut A: represents potential loss of leadership, ~50% of original cost. • Cut B: represents a strategic retreat from the current successful position ~40% of original proposed costs – aim to continue to do some areas properly and pull out of others completely. I am still waiting for a detailed agenda from PPARC

  7. The situation is made harder by: SUMMARY • The revised agreement between PPARC and CCLRC whereby there will be no explicit contribution from CCLRC to the ILC. Currently the CCLRC contribution is approximately £0.5M p.a. • Erosion of the cash value by Full Economic Costing. For example, the cost of a university RA has increased in some cases from around £50k p.a. to £70k p.a. (both in 2006 £). • Erosion of the cash value by inflation. • The cessation of the accelerator studentships programme; any project studentships will now have to be supported from the project award. • The completion of the EuroTeV programme. EuroTeV funds had been used to bolster the PPARC/CCLRC resource for LC-ABD phase 1

  8. The Phase 2 WP managers came up with 2 scenarios: SUMMARY • Scenario 1 is likely to be (broadly) funded. • The fine details of Scenario 1 are being worked out. • Scenario 2 is an aspiration, as input to the STFC • Accelerator science review, due for this year. It represents, • approximately, the PPRP “cut A” scenario plus some delay.

  9. Current Status SUMMARY • A programme has been worked out under 2 scenarios (see above) • The detailed programmes have been worked out by WP managers/task leaders. • Some optimisation is being addressed within the Accelerator Institutes with respect to their internal programmes. • Some fine tuning with respect to the detailed funding profile (new posts, key hardware etc.) is ongoing. • Phase 2 should have started April 1st 2007…

More Related