millie
Uploaded by
4 SLIDES
178 VIEWS
40LIKES

NSF AST Divestment Issues and Future Directions for Optical-Infrared Astronomy

DESCRIPTION

The NSF AST portfolio review highlights the "divestment" of certain telescopes, impacting open-access astronomy. Various divestment strategies include transferring operations, developing partnerships, mothballing, or decommissioning telescopes. Decisions are anticipated by late 2013 to yield savings by FY 2017. The long-term Optical-Infrared (OIR) system should prioritize >4m telescopes, focusing on community-led approaches to optimize science delivery. The role of private operators and the coordination between Gemini and NOAO are vital for future advancements in this field.

1 / 4

Download Presentation

NSF AST Divestment Issues and Future Directions for Optical-Infrared Astronomy

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. NSF/AST Additional Material AAAC Jim Ulvestad December 1, 2012

  2. Divestment issues • “Divestment,” in the parlance of the Portfolio Review, implies removal of a telescope from the NSF AST budget. This encompasses many options, all of which are likely to reduce or eliminate open-access astronomy research time • Divest to another operator, possibly with another mission • Develop funding partnership, possibly with mix of missions • Mothball • Close/deconstruct • Timescale for divestment decisions advertised as late 2013, to enable savings by time of FY 2017 • Consideration of interagency partnerships follows various mixes of options 1 and 2 above • Strategy: interagency discussions about options/needs. If the other agency has interest, explore range of possible partnership models. Within agencies, determine how choices will be made among options.

  3. OIR System Definition • Long-term directions inferred from Portfolio Review Report • LSST should be at heart of OIR system • OIR system should center on >4m telescopes, with 4m telescopes being used primarily as supporting capabilities or survey capabilities • This leads to many questions • What does the post-2021 system look like, as a whole? • How do you make a transition to that system, and make the transition while continuing to deliver science capabilities along the way? • What are the opportunities to motivate private telescope operators to participate in an integrated system? • How much of the system is defined top-down vs. on a more ad-hoc bottom-up basis? • How is the system coordinated and managed? • How do Gemini and NOAO change over the next decade?

  4. Moving Toward the OIR System • Community self-organizing in workshops and other venues to determine best methods of doing LSST science • NSF and DOE discussing how DOE mission goals might be achieved using telescopes in the NSF part of the system • Given “Rocky-III” report, DOE has an idea of where the gaps are in their integrated program • Need community-led assessment of what we really want the system to look like post-2020 to deliver DOE mission science and NSF investigator science • Which telescopes, instruments, and observing methods best deliver the overall science capabilities and return?

More Related