Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

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

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "LC-ABD Phase 2 Outcome G. A. Blair, RHUL LC-ABD Meeting RHUL 12 th April 2007 PPRP Meetings Feedback from PPRP Outcome."— Presentation transcript:

1 LC-ABD Phase 2 Outcome G. A. Blair, RHUL LC-ABD Meeting RHUL 12 th April 2007 PPRP Meetings Feedback from PPRP Outcome

2 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) Iain Steele Steve Boyd Steve Holmes (FNAL) Daniel Schulte (CERN) Additional input from External referees ILC GDE R&D Board

3 3LC-ABD: PPRP, 5 September 2006 LC-ABD programme addresses closely-connected areas Beam Quality and Stability: Luminosity Production Polarised Positron Source Main Linac Cavity Wakefields Beam Dumps Instrumentation and Diagnostics Fast Feedback Crab Cavity Beam Delivery System Energy Spectrometer Damping Rings Survey, Alignment and Stabilisation A.Wolski

4 4LC-ABD: PPRP, 5 September 2006 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 31 st 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 Visiting Panel I am still waiting for a detailed agenda from PPARC 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. PPRP Scenarios

7 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 The situation is made harder by:

8 SUMMARY The Phase 2 WP managers came up with 2 scenarios: All in £k2007/82008/92009/10Total by WP Scenario Scenario 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 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 1 st 2007… Current Status


Download ppt "LC-ABD Phase 2 Outcome G. A. Blair, RHUL LC-ABD Meeting RHUL 12 th April 2007 PPRP Meetings Feedback from PPRP Outcome."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google