Gemini and the MNRF: An UpdateGary Da Costa

Chair, Australian Gemini Steering Committee

Background

Original aim of the MNRF proposal in the context of Optical/IR Astronomy was to double Australia’s share of the Gemini telescopes, though only 85% of the requested funding was awarded. The extra share (arising from Chile’s change of status in Gemini) was to be funded through the provision of locally fabricated instruments to the Gemini telescopes.

However, the Gemini Finance Committee and the Gemini Board decided that only cash payments could be used to purchase the Chile share. This meant that, through the MNRF program, at most ~50% of the Chile share could be purchased.

After a protracted negotiation process we eventually purchased 30% of the Chile share (i.e. extra 1.43% total share) and the community has had access to this additional time since 2003.

Background Continued…

However, as a consequence not purchasing more of the Chile share, and with the rise in the Australian $, there remains of order ~$6M of MNRF ‘Gemini’ funds that are currently uncommitted.

AABoM has formally requested AGSC’s advice on the disposition of these funds, suggesting as possible options:

• Purchase additional share of Gemini if available • Purchase additional nights on Gemini from other partners • Cover (downward) fluctuations in exchange rate • Commence design studies or negotiations, or build instrumentation, to secure strategic advantage for Australia in Gemini or in other world-class or next-generation telescopes. • Any other appropriate use.

In this context AGSC/AABoM received a number of proposals for these uncommitted funds:

• Support for ‘PILOT’ a 2m class telescope in Antarctica • Support for an Australian ELT Project Scientist • Support for ‘Commissioning Astronomers’ for efficient and effective community use of Australian-built Gemini instruments • Support for Australian involvement in the Gemini Wide Field Optical Multi-Object Spectrograph (GWFMOS) – an instrument that is a high-priority outcome of the Aspen Future Gemini Instrumentation process. • Buy nights on Gemini-S from the UK.

Input on these proposals was sought from the community through AGSAC, the Australian Gemini Science Advisory Committee.

• Responses came from both individuals and from local meetings, and there was broad input from across the community.

• Not surprisingly there was a diversity of views…e.g. “I’d support an ELT project scientist very strongly”

“please don’t waste the money on a [ELT] project scientist”“buying nights more nights on Gemini, the majority are not in favour of this option”“buying more Gemini nights: this was certainly one of the most preferred options generally.”

Yesterday afternoon AGSC met to consider these proposals…

Support for ‘PILOT’ a 2m class telescope in Antarctica.

• It is clear that there is considerable potential for exciting science to be carried out in Antarctica, particularly given the recent results on the seeing at Dome C (for heights > ~30m above ground, the median seeing was 0.27” over six-week period; Lawrence et al, submitted to Nature).

• However, AGSC felt that it would be inconsistent with the aims of the current MNRF program to award funds to the PILOT program. Other funding avenues, such as through the upcoming decadal review process, were considered more appropriate.

Support for Australian ELT Project Scientist.

• It is clear that involvement in an ELT program is a key strategic objective for the long term future of Australian Optical/IR Astronomy. It is also clear that there is a lot of activity in this area internationally at present, and that there would be benefits in having an Australian ELT Project Scientist as a focal point for ELT activities both nationally and internationally.

• However, AGSC felt that it could not support the ELT Project Scientist proposal in the form in which it was presented by the ELT Working Group (3 yr Level C full time position, 75% ELT activities, 25% own research). ASGC instead suggested that the ELTWG reconsider the proposal, perhaps in the form of a position with 50% commitment to ELT activities. A new proposal would also need information on potential recruitment processes, host institution(s), etc.

Support for ‘Commissioning Astronomers’.

• It is clear that it is important to maximize the scientific return from the investment in the locally fabricated Gemini instruments.

• However, AGSC felt that there were more appropriate ways to fund the activities envisaged for the ‘Commissioning Astronomers’. These included ARC Discovery Projects for science related activities and the Australian Gemini Office, e.g. the Deputy Project Scientist position(s), for support related activities.

Support for Australian Involvement in GWFMOS.

• This instrument, as recognized through the Aspen process, has the potential to make lasting contributions in a number of scientific areas of direct interest to the Australian community. It is important therefore, that the feasibility study, being carried out by the AAO together with a number of other institutions across the Gemini partnership, be carried out as thoroughly and completely as possible.

• Consequently, AGSC recommended that the $239k requested by the AAO to support the feasibility study be supported. This amount represents 50% of the AAO’s cost of involvement in the feasibility study, after allowing for the AAO’s share of the available Gemini funding. The other 50% comes from AAO matching (in-kind) funds.

Buying Nights on Gemini-S from the UK.

• AGSC felt that this represented a strategic opportunity for the Australian community to make a substantial scientific impact with the Gemini telescopes during the lifetime of the MNRF program.

• Consequently, AGSC recommended that 15-20 nights on Gemini-S be purchased from the UK (subject to an acceptable price per night) for use in semesters 2005A and B, with the expectation of purchasing a similar amount of time for use in 2006. The intention is that these additional nights would be allocated by ATAC, but that they would be directed towards Australian programs of larger scope and potential impact than are currently supported. ASGC will generate guidelines for such programs and distribute an ‘Announcement of Opportunity’ well in advance of the semester deadline.

So where have we come to…

• The recommendations to support the GWFMOS feasibility study and to purchase nights on Gemini-S from the UK account for upto $4M of the uncommitted MNRF funds. AGSC felt that the remaining monies should remain uncommitted at this time.

• As for the disposition of those remaining uncommitted funds, and the purchase of nights in 2006, AGSC recommended that this should be revisited in approximately a year’s time when there will be more definite information on the likelihood of GWFMOS progressing beyond the feasibility study stage, and on the level of community involvement in, and desire for, larger scale scientific programs with Gemini.

At its meeting this morning, AABoM accepted these recommendations.

Questions and Discussion….

Telescope Time Availability:

• Current (2004B) ~6 nights per semester per telescope for the Australian community is approaching the steady-state operations allocation for our (6.2%) partner share.

• Demand for these nights is clearly taking off…2004B proposal statistics: 31 proposals (13 G-N, 18 G-S) with an overall oversubscription rate of 4.0 (2.9 G-N, 5.4 G-S!).

• Now seeing for the first time the oversubscription for Gemini matching or outweighing the oversubscription for the AAT.

• Collaboration with Gemini partners is strong: 14 of 31 proposals are “joint” – i.e. also requesting time from another partner TAC.

Instrumentation Updates (or what’s coming…):

• NIFS 1-2.5 micron R ~ 5000 Integral-Field Spectrograph to work with ALTAIR, the G-N facility Adaptive Optics system.

NIFS-II is being built by Auspace and should be ready for commissioning on Gemini-N in semester 2005A.

Instrumentation Updates (or what’s coming…):

• NICI Dual channel 1-2.5 micron coronagraphic imager with its own dedicated curvature sensing AO system, and a variety of filters, beam-splitting options, masks, etc. Commissioning on Gemini-S in 2005A (NASA funded).

• bHROS Fibre-fed bench mounted R ~150,000 high dispersion optical spectrograph (~35 nm simultaneous coverage).

Undergoing throughput tests at present. Gemini Science Committee has set a goal of a minimum total throughput of ~10% for bHROS to be formally commissioned. If it meets the target, it will be commissioned in 2004B and be available for community use in 2005A.

Instrumentation Updates (longer term):

• GSAOI 1-2.5 micron Adaptive Optics Imager for Gemini-S. Will work initially with single laser AO system, and then the multi-laser Multi-Conjugate AO system (AO corrected images over a ~1’ field-of-view). Passed Critical Design Review, on schedule for commissioning late 2005.

• FLAMINGOS II Cryogenic 1-2.5 micron Multi-Object Spectrograph for Gemini-N. Scheduled for commissioning in 2006.

These two instruments are the last of the “first generation”.

Aspen process (future Gemini instrumentation):

Partner national meetings Aspen Workshop Gemini Science Committee recommendations Gemini Board

• GSC Minimum Core Package (not priority order)

Instrument Science EnabledExtreme AO Direct detection of gas-giant planets, proto-

planetary disksHi-Res NIR spect Many applicationsWide Field Fiber-fed Unique facility with wide applicationOptical MOS

• Gemini Board basically endorsed the GSC’s recommendations.

Aspen process (future Gemini instrumentation):

Specific Outcomes:• Announcements of Opportunities for Concept Design Studies for Extreme-AO and NIR High Res spectrograph instruments. Probable these instruments will go to fabrication given that are probably funds to build these in the Gemini budget.

• Announcements of Opportunities for Feasibility Concept Studies for the Gemini Wide Field Optical MOS and for a Ground-Layer Adaptive Optics (GLAO) system (GSC ‘Other opportunity’). These instruments (GWFMOS is recognised as higher priority) will probably fundamentally change the way the telescope(s) operate(move to “campaign science” rather than “individual PI driven”).At present there isn’t the funding to build GWFMOS but agencies are prepared to consider the case.

Contingency. • AGSC recommended that: (1) any ‘contingency’ funds not be labeled as being required for a specific future use (e.g. paying operations costs beyond the end of the MNRF program);(2) AABoM consider paying in advance the operating costs commitment for the balance of the MNRF program.