Dear All, below I attach the agenda for the 2nd meeting of the ING's IWG. If you have any suggestions for additions/amendments, please let me know. It will be held in the RGO meeting room at the Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge. This room is in the building that used to house the RGO - it's on the first floor. I believe that you might be able to gain entrance to the RGO building through it's main entrance (although the building is now used by other University groups). Alternatively you can go to the IoA's Old Observatory building (which houses their library) and ask the secretary there to show you the route through to the RGO meeting room. For general contact info for the IoA see http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/contact.html and the location map at http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/images/cambmap.gif In terms of the meeting, the most important task for this IWG is to recommend which (if any) of the instrumentation proposals received for new instruments should be supported. This recommendation will then go to the ING Board. I would urge you all to carefully study the FOUR proposals (Mosaic, F-P for NAOMI, Coronograph for NAOMI, and OASIS) before the meeting. For those of you unable to attend, Simon and perhaps Santiago, I'd be most grateful if you could email me your comments/inputs before the meeting. Your input could then be considered as well. I haven't put this down as an agenda item - but if there is time we might like to consider how the instrumentation future for the ING fits in with the long term vision of astronomy (the vision process that pparc has recently been carrying out). As I mentioned before there will also be a meeting in Cambridge at the IoA discussing the ING Wide Field Survey - 28+29 Oct 1999. If you would like to attend this please contact Richard McMahon (rgm@ast.cam.ac.uk). If you need help booking hotels in Cambridge please contact Rachael Miles (miles@ing.iac.es) - whe shopuld be able to help out. I'll have claim forms available for your travel expenses, hence please retain your travel and hotel receipts. Hope to see you all in Cambridge on the 1 November 1999. All the best, Nic Walton ----------------- agenda --------------------------- IWG - November 1 1999: (10.00-17.00) ------------------------------------ Location: RGO Meeting Room Institute of Astronomy University of Cambridfge, UK Members: Richard McMahon Cosmology - Chair rgm@ast.cam.ac.uk Koen Kuijken Galaxies - NL k.h.kuijken@astro.rug.nl Simon Green Solar sfg1@ukc.ac.uk Vik Dhillon Stellar vik.dhillon@sheffield.ac.uk Santiago Arribas Galaxies - E sam@ll.iac.es Gavin Dalton Galaxies gbd@astro.ox.ac.uk Nic Walton ING - Secretary naw@ing.iac.es In Attendance: Andy Longmore UKATC - AO expert ajl@roe.ac.uk Proposed Agenda: 1. Introduction: welcome 2. Matters arising from meeting of April 6 1999: accept the minutes 3. Review of new instrument proposals: 3.1 Mosaic 3.2 F-Ps for NAOMI 3.3 Coronograph for NAOMI 3.4 OASIS for NAOMI 4. Review of LDSS/TAURUS adoption proposals 4.1 Durham/IoA LDSS bid 4.2 Manchester TAURUS bid 4.3 IoA TAURUS bid 4.4 French group TAURUS bid 5. Brief update on on-going ING developments/enhancements, in particular: 5.1 red CCDs 5.2 NAOMI 5.3 UltraDAS (now includes the IR detectors as well) 5.4 AF2/WYFFOS enhancements 5.5 LIRIS 6. Brief Summary of the April 1999 ING Instrumentation Workshop. 7. NL instrumenation developments of interest to the IWG [KK] 8. E instrumentation developments of interest to the IWG [SAM] 9. New guarranteed time scheme for teams developing new instruments for the ING 10. Any Other Business ----------------------------------------------------------------- Appendix A: Minutes of Last Meeting: Sheffield, April 6 1999 ING Instrumentation Working Group ================================= Minutes of the meeting held Tue 6 April 1999 --------------------------------------------- Location: SCR, Halifax Hall of Residence, Univ of Sheffield Time: 11.00 - 18.00 Present: Dr R G McMahon (Chair) (from 12.30) (RGM) Dr G B Dalton (GBD) Dr V S Dhillon (VSD) Dr S F Green (SFG) Dr K Kuijken (KK) Dr N A Walton (Secretary) (NAW) In Attendance: Dr R G M Rutten (Director ING) (RGMR) Apologies: Dr S Arribas (SAM) Papers: these were distributed at the meeting or included in an email to all committee members from RGMR 31/3/1999 a. ING terms of Reference and Background to the ING/IWG b. JSC Nov 98 extract - Future Role of the Telescopes c. JSC May 99 extract - Enhancement Prog. for 1999/2000 d. GBFC Jan 99 extract - GranTeCan and the ING e. Status Report on NAOMI - Chris Packham 4/4/1999 f. Status Report on INGRID - Andy Longmore 4/1999 g. Status Report on AF2 small fibers - Don Pollacco 24/3/1999 h. SAURON Report - Don Pollacco 24/3/1999 i. Report on CCD acquisitions - Steve Smartt 24/3/1999 Abbreviations and Glossary: CIRSI The IoAs 2kx2k near IR camera (used on the INT & WHT) GBE NL's "gebiedsbestuur exacte wetenschappen" (Physical Sciences) GBFC Ground Based Facilities Committee IFU Integral Field Unit INGRID a near IR 1kx1k camera for the WHT INT 2.5-m Isaac Newton Telescope LIRIS a near IR spectrograph being built by the IAC for the WHT JKT 1.0-m Jacobus Kapteyn Telescope NAOMI The optical/IR AO system for the WHT SAURON Durham/Leiden/Lyon IFU spectrograph for the WHT STJ ESTECs super-conducting tunnel junction detectors WHT 4.2-m William Herschel Telescope 1. Introduction: welcome and statement of purpose of the re-formed IWG 1.1 RGMR welcomed the members to the re-formed Instrumentation Working Group (IWG) of the ING. 1.2 RGMR gave an explanation of why the IWG had been re-constituted. Declining budgets and the end of guaranteed funding for major new instrumention on 4-m and smaller class telescopes had rendered the role of the previous IWG redundant (that focusing overly on technical issues involved in commissioning new instruments and the subsequent tracking of their progress). 1.3 The previous IWG had reported to the Joint Steering Committee (JSC). The IWG would now report directly to the Director, ING. The IWG would provide input in formulating the strategic instrumentation plan for the ING. 1.4 The new reporting structure reflects the recent change in the ING's management structure, with the transfer of all ING budgets (including development) to the Director, ING. The IWG reporting directly to the Director, ING, would enable a speedier generation of the strategic plan for eventual approval by the JSC. 1.5 RGMR noted that the new IWG would provide the vital science input as drivers to future ING instrumentation plans. The membership is therefore drawn from active astronomers representing a broad cross section of the ING's user base. 1.6 The committee were asked to comment on the draft terms of reference. RGMR noted that the draft terms were similar to the old, but now referred to the Director, ING. 1.7 VSD noted that the IWG should now spend less time on monitoring - thus this point should be de-emphasised. Some discussion followed on whether it was desirable for the IWG to be a formal (sub-)committee of PPARC. The AGREED view was that this would not help in increasing the credibility of the IWG. 1.8 The AGREED terms of reference for the IWG were: * Provide scientifically informed advice to the Director, ING, on the instrumentation programmes (development, enhancements and operational) for the telescopes of the ING and to monitor their progress. * Be responsible as and when required for the drafting of `Announcements of Opportunity', evaluating responses and advising the Director, ING on the priorities for implementation. * Undertake such other tasks as may from time to time be delegated to it by the Director, ING 1.9 It was considered important the the IWG take a systems approach, thus consider not only the instrument but also operations, data products and scientific exploitation of the instrument/package. 1.10 VSD recalled that previously the IWG had received instrument proposals submitted to other PPARC funding routes (e.g. RAP) for comment. It was AGREED that it was not appropriate for the IWG to now comment on these applications. However, the IWG should still see these applications for strategic planning purposes. 1.11 it was AGREED that agenda and associated papers for future IWG meetings would be made available to the committee at least TWO WEEKS prior to the meeting. [ACTION: NAW] 1.12 RGMR commented on the new membership. The committee was composed of scientists representing a cross section of astronomical research areas. In addition, one member would be drawn from the Dutch and Spanish astronomical communities (mirroring their representation on the JSC). 1.13 The procedures (as set out in the email from RGMR dated 31/3/1999 to all IWG members) was AGREED by the committee. 1.14 RGMR presented his overheads on the terms of reference for the IWG and background to development issues at the ING (Papers a.). He noted the major funding sources for the ING, and commented that there had been significant reductions in the ING funding in the last seven years (of order 40%). The closure of the Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO) in Oct 1998 had meant the loss of significant effort in development and enhancements. 1.15 The recent International Visiting Panel's `Cannon Report' (Oct 1998) had recommended that 10-20% of the telescope operations cost be channeled towards development activities. This was now in progress with the introduction of a new `Operations Team' model at the ING in Aug 1998. Major new Developments would now need to be funded on a case by case basis through successful bids to outside funding agencies (e.g. PPARC's GBFC, NWO's GBE, JIF etc). 1.16 RGMR reviewed the ING's present imaging and spectroscopic instruments on the three telescopes. He noted the range of 'own user' instrumentation that had recently seen use on the ING telescopes (e.g. CIRSI, STJs). He also drew attention to the major new 'own user' instruments being developed (TEIFU - end 1999 commissioning on the WHT, and LIRIS - end 2002). RGMR noted that the present instrumentation suite was too extensive in view of the new instruments, such as NAOMI, arriving. 1.17 The currently major ING funded developments were given - INGRID, NAOMI and the AO-LGS study. These are all UK funded only. It was noted that INGRID was not upgradeable to a 2k x 2k detector. 1.18 The usage of the main WHT instruments was given (data taken from 1996 and 1997). RGMR noted that these numbers would have changed recently due to the introduction of AF2/WYFFOS and soon INGRID. However, it was clear the ISIS would continue to be a key WHT instrument. GBD queried the cost of operating and maintaining the various instruments. RGMR noted that he had recently made a cost analysis that showed that while all instruments have differing costs associated with them - the main cost is in total number of instruments. This requires ING staff to retain a too diverse specialist knowledge base and support a large number of instrument changes. 1.19 RGMR raised the question: what instruments should be discontinued, and looked in particular at LDSS and TAURUS on the WHT. He noted that both instruments have had relatively little use in the last few years and require extensive support (LDSS mask manufacture is problematic, while TAURUS requires specialist Fabry-Perot knowledge). In order for these instruments to remain competitive both would need extensive upgrades. RGMR noted though that both instruments support good science. SFG stressed that the ING should look at instrument capability in areas that are not widely available at other facilities. 1.20 RGMR presented a number of options as to the future of LDSS and TAURUS. The status quo was not considered realistic. It was felt difficult to decide which should be de-commissioned over the other. The option of offering them one a 1 semester in 4 basis was not supported due to the loss of operational knowledge that would result. It was noted that both instruments suffered when compared to their counterparts at the AAO. Thus, if they were to offered on a longer term basis, they would need to be enhanced to provide significantly improved performance. 1.21 It was AGREED that the idea of combining LDSS with TAURUS to provide the functionality of both in one improved instrument - especially exploiting the possibilities offered by the Tunable Filter developments - should be considered at some future date. In the interim LDSS would be withdrawn from semester 2000A with TAURUS re-instated from 2000A with TTF capability. [see later discussion in 6. as to priorities] 1.22 RGMR listed the recently approved internally funded ING instrument enhancements. These include: upgrades to the computing infrastructure, the new ULTRA Data Acquisition System, AF2 small (1.5 arcsec) fibers, CCD (MIT/LL `red/blue') procurement, the WYFFOS long camera, a CCD acquisition TV system, and the WHT control system upgrade. 1.23 Finally RGMR outlined the `Mission of the Telescopes'. This was AGREED (with the exceptions noted in 1.24) by the committee. It was noted that it was essential to use NAOMI's optical performance as the base for optical high spatial resolution imaging and spectroscopy. 1.24 There was some discussion as to the use of bright time on the INT. It was AGREED that the development of a new high-resolution spectrograph on the INT is not of high priority - this work would probably be better carried out on the WHT. RGM noted that CIRSI would be available from April - August 2000 and years thereafter on the INT. He foresaw applying for a significant public access survey in the J and H bands of a 0 deg declination strip (to compliment WFC U to Z data of the same area). 1.25 VSD queried whether it was sensible to develop IR AO spectroscopy - he noted that this is where Gemini would have significant advantages over the 4.2-m WHT. It was AGREED that the development of IR AO spectroscopy at the ING should take lower priority than exploitation of optical AO imaging and spectroscopy. 1.26 The status of access to the TEIFU AO feed to WYFFOS was unclear. [ACTION: RGMR to determine terms of access to TEIFU] 1.27 GBD suggested that the possibility of feeding UES from NAOMI should be investigated. [ACTION: NAW to pursue] 2. Business arising from the last meeting - the INT/UKIRT WF outcome 2.1 NAW gave a brief summary of the outcome of the ING proposal for a wide field J+H camera for the INT. This proposal had been reviewed by a number of PPARC committees, eventually PPARC decided to support the more expensive UKIRT proposal for a JHK camera. 2.2 The committee AGREED that there was no immediate merit in further developing the INT prime focus optical camera. However, when the large IR facility camera is constructed for UKIRT, the INT camera should be increased in size to match the field of the UKIRT camera. 3. Summary of instrumentation and related developments currently underway at the ING (internal projects). Reports on the major ING development projects currently in progress were presented. 3.1 INGRID: the committee considered the brief progress report from the INGRID project scientist, Chris Packham. Due to a failure in one of the optical components, commissioning is delayed until later in semester 99B. 3.2 NAOMI: the report from the project scientist, Andy Longmore, UKATC was noted. Commissioning at the WHT is currently scheduled for March 2000. The committee stressed the importance of exploiting NAOMI in the optical and was pleased to note the planned use of an optical camera with ELECTRA during the summer commissioning of this instrument. The data obtained from this would indicate the perfomance that might be expected with NAOMI in the R and I bands. 3.3 AF2 small fibres: the report from the project scientist, Don Pollacco was considered. Small fibres will be implemented begin 2000. It was noted that significant delays to this project had resulted from the loss of key staff with the closure of RGO. 3.4 The committee discussed the future use of the large fibre (2.7 arcsec) module after the introduction of the small fibre (1.5 arcsec) module. The committee recalled that the AAO's 2dF unit had 1.8 arcsec fibres. It was AGREED that there would be no justification in continuing to offer the AF2 large fibre module. 3.5 UltraDAS - Data Acquisition System: NAW (project scientist) presented a verbal report. He outlined that there had been some delays to the project due to problems experienced in San Diego in the production of the PCI interface hardware to the SUN Sparc computer. However, commissioning at the WFC on the INT was foreseen fro August 1999. The committee emphasised the importance of the UltraDAS project - noting the great improvement it would offer in readout times (WFC down to under 30 seconds). 3.6 CCD Procurement: the report from the CCD project scientist, Steve Smartt was noted. The ING have bought into at a 25% share into a new foundry run organized by Gerry Luppino at UH for the next generation of MIT/LL CCDs. These have excellent red sensitivity, but with improved blue sensitivity (similar to the INGs existing EEV42 devices). It is expected that the ING should receive 2-3 science grade devices from this run. 3.7 RGM stated that a 2048 x 2048 HAWAII-2 IR array was important for development of AF2/WYFFOS into the IR for wide field multi-object near IR (J+H) spectroscopy. The committee AGREED that this option should be studied. If feasible a bid should be placed to fund the upgrade of AF2/WYFFOS for J+H IR work. [ACTION: NAW/RGMR to initiate feasibility study for AF2/WYFFOS J+H developments, including the upgrade to a HAWAII-2 2kx2k array] 4. Summary of instrumentation and related developments currently underway at the ING (external projects). These were briefly discussed. 4.1 TEIFU: will take the optical AO output from NAOMI and feed the WYFFOS spectrograph. TEIFU will provide optical AO spectroscopic capability. 4.2 SCAM - STJs: NAW reported that the 6x6 array had seen first light on the WHT in Feb 1999. The ING were considering the case for a AF2 fibre feed to future STJ arrays. The committee supported this development. 4.3 SAURON: The report from Don Pollacco was noted. This private (Durham/Leiden/Lyon) instrument was successfully commissioned at the WHT in Feb 1999. It is unlikely that it will be available for non-partner use for the next two years. 5. Summary of Scientific programmes in progress 5.1 Wide Field Survey (WFS) : NAW (project manager) presented a status report of the WFS. The first observations were obtained in Aug 1998. To date some 40 sq degrees had been surveyed. All sloan-gunn filters (g', r', i') were now delivered (after some 4-6 month delay). Significant progress had been made in the data pipeline. This was now operational with fully reduced data and object catalogues available for all WFS data. The committee welcomed the WFS and the significant scientific impact that it would have. 5.2 There was some discussion on the extension of public access survey's to make use of other ING instrumentation. In particular the use of the upgraded AF2/WYFFOS combination was raised. GBD recalled that the AAO 2dF survey was at best reaching R=21 mag. The new small fibres with AF2 on the WHT should reach R=23 - a significant improvement. 5.3 The committee AGREED that a WFS type public access survey would not be appropriate for the AF2. This is because the science would be focussed (c.f. the Galaxy and QSO redshift AAO 2dF survey's) and not therefore of the wide use of the WFS data. It was considered that large proposals be presented to PATT, in a similar manner to the AAO 2dF surveys. This may include instant public access to the data, but would be for focused science aims, perhaps taking input samples from the WFS data set. 6. The ING Instrumentational Plan was presented by NAW. The committee AGREED the outline priority options being: - AF2/WYFFOS enhancements - Optical AO imaging + Tunable filter A merged instrument offering the capabilities of TAURUS/TTF/LDSS was considered attractive, but at a lesser priority. 6.1 AF2/WYFFOS enhancements: NAW outlined the proposed enhancements path - with a duration of two years. - 160 small fibre (1.5 arcsec) module - WYFFOS long camera with a 4k x 4k camera (initially 2x EEV42, later 2x MIT/LL devices). - multiple dIFU's at Prime (1200 fibres to WYFFOS) - Z-H spectroscopy with IR fibres and INGRID as detector - Upgrade of IR capability with a larger 2kx2k device and more fibres The committee AGREED that this represented a good upgrade route, and considered deployable Integral Field Units (dIFUs) to be an interesting development. These coupled with the large field of view offered by the prime focus of the WHT would create a powerful scientific tool. 6.2 Enhanced optical camera (4k x 4k with FP mode) for NAOMI: the committee AGREED that this should be pursued, especially exploring the use of a Tunable Filter. 6.3 A Fibre feed for SCAM at GHRILL was seen as an excellent idea for possible funding through PPARCs recently announced instrumentation initiative. 6.4 A near IR wide field JHK MOS at the cooled WHT cassegrain focus was not discussed. 6.5 The 9.1-m La Palma Spectroscopic Telescope (LAST): NAW presented the concept of constructing a HET type telescope on La Palma, with a project cost of some UKP 20M. The committee AGREED that this should be put forward if the GTC JIF bid fails. 7. The ING Instrumentation conference, Sheffield 7-9 April 1999 NAW noted that the first ING instrumentation conference would take place in Sheffield over the following three days. During this time input from the ING user community would be sought. Important would be the afternoon discussion session (8 Apr 1999). The committee AGREED that this conference represented a significant advance in the INGs interaction with its user community in determining priorities for its future instrumentation offer. The IWG would take into account input from this meeting, a full report to be made at the next IWG meeting. [ACTION: NAW/RGMR - summarize conclusions of the Sheffield Conference] 8. NL instrumentation: KK gave a brief summary of recent developments in Dutch astronomical instrumentation. he noted the ING focussed instruments: SAURON (previously referred to) and the PN spectrograph being constructed in Groningen for use on the WHT (commissioning for mid 2000). KK stated that the majority of NOVA (NL funding programme) was focussed on ESO related projects (VLTI-MIDI, VST-Omegacam, ANDES) or Radio/mm instrumentation (Westerbork, PUMA-pulsar finder, LMA). KK mentioned that there was no 'Dutch' view on instrumentation development. There were a number of views, with a powerful lobby to focus on ESO/VLT and reduce the NL commitment to the ING. However KK thought that there was somewhat more interest in the ING facility now. 9. GTC involvement - possible instrumentation development: Due to lack of time little discussion took place on this item. However, the committee noted that the GTCs major impact would be in 3-4 years. 10. The Instrumentation direction - recommendations This item was deferred until the next meeting. Input from the Sheffield conference would be included at this point. 11. AOB: The next meeting would be arranged for Autumn 1999 - date to be confirmed. Nicholas A Walton (IWG secretary) 4 May 1999 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appendix B: Comments received on the minutes (edited): B.1: From Vik Dhillon: 4 May 1999 1. You mention that LDSS will be withdrawn from 2000A. Did we agree this? Not that it really matters. Presumably this will be until a possible LDSS/TAURUS-all-in-one instrument comes along? Does LDSS have to be withdrawn at all? Or is Rene really keen to get rid of at least one asap? Can TAURUS be upgraded to TTF and all the other little renovations be done by as early as 2000A as you say? 2. AF2 large fibres: What if someone wants to do absolute flux work? Then as large a fibre as possible will be best, of course. I'm not sure how many people are after this kind of thing, but I can certainly imagine a few projects which might benefit from this (and which aren't so concerned with going really faint). What is involved in keeping the AF2 large fibres available?