1. NGAO Science Instrument Reuse Part 2: Update and required feedback NGAO IWG Anna Moore, Sean Adkins NGAO Team Meeting January 22, 2007

2. NGAO IWG 1/22/072 Status: NIRC2 NIRC2 suitability for thermal L/M imager presented at last meeting –In summary, yes, NIRC2 would (over) satisfy imager requirements –Some upgrades would be required for this, but likely would not cost anything like a new instrument –Science flow down for thermal L/M imager needs developing, especially acceptable range of WFE –Telescope background in the M band is currently very high according to NIRC2 PI. This science is optimally done using a deformable secondary and Cassegrain mounted imager, there will be other 8 m telescopes that have deformable secondaries in the future, can Keck-NGAO compete?

3. NGAO IWG 1/22/073 Status: OSIRIS OSIRIS documentation has been reviewed and list of clarification questions sent to James Larkin, we expect a reply shortly We plan to summarize the results of the OSIRIS re-use trade study at the next NGAO team meeting, but at this point we have some questions that we need the science team to answer. The top question is regarding field of view –OSIRIS FOVs range from 1.28″ x 0.32″ to 6.4″ x 4.8″ 64 x 48 NB mode 64 x 16 BB mode 4 spaxel scales (20/35/50/100 mas) at R~3800 for 3 smallest plate scales and R~3000 at the 100 mas scale –In the development last June of the NGAO science requirements we carried forward a concept for a “wide field OSIRIS” which led to these notional requirements for the NGAO near-IR IFU: 160 x 50 spaxels in NB mode (largest FOV 16″ x 5″) 80 x 50 spaxels in BB mode (largest FOV 8″ x 5″) 3 plate scales (20/50/100mas) at R~4000 –The current NGAO SRD (version 3) so far indicates only a 1″ x 1″ near-IR IFU FOV

4. NGAO IWG 1/22/074 Required feedback: NIRC2 as NGAO “Thermal Near-IR Imager” We ask your concurrence to change the name of the instrument from “Thermal Near-IR Imager” to “L and M band Imager” to avoid confusion. The requirements for this instrument are sketchy, very limited treatment so far in the current SRD –The notional 25″ x 25″ FOV is based on simply scaling from the nominal plate scale with a 1K x 1K detector, what are the real science driven FOV requirements? –Further work is required to define the acceptable range of residual wavefront error for this instrument (this is critical for NIRC2 as it is known to have a reasonable amount of WFE and field dependent WFE) Should NIRC2 be seriously considered for reuse as the NIR imager?

5. NGAO IWG 1/22/075 Required feedback: OSIRIS as the NGAO near-IR IFU In the current SRD we find only one specific reference to a requirement for a near-IR IFU (radial velocities at the GC): –20 or 35 mas spaxels –1″ x 1″ FOV –goal of 10 km/s RV precision It would be helpful to have information to: –Prioritize the importance of higher spectral resolution (up to R ~15,000) that may be needed to better resolve Brγ and He lines in K-band –Clarify if OSIRIS R ~3800 is close enough to R ~4000 given in the observing plan discussion (SRD §2.3.6) –What about the need for different plate scales? OSIRIS offers 20/35/50/100 mas Other possible single near-IR IFU science? –Extragalactic science makes a clear case for the deployable near-IR IFU Would a single object near-IR IFU have any applications in extragalactic science that should drive requirements, for example: –Gravitationally lensed galaxies –2D spectroscopy of galaxies –Extrasolar planet characterization High contrast imaging mentions low resolution IFU For low resolution spectroscopy: answer question in text, “Can it just use narrow-band filters?” Does not seem a definitive request for an IFU, and only R ~100 needed so using NGAO NIR IFU possibly overkill? Since a coronagraph is needed, and high contrast is emphasized should this a special instrument?

6. NGAO IWG 1/22/076 Required feedback: OSIRIS as NGAO near-IR IFU Are there science cases that demand near-IR IFU FOVs greater than what OSIRIS provides? The NGAO system is expected to have very low K band thermal background. OSIRIS also has low internal backgrounds, but the pupil stop sizes (and shape) still dominate the background levels. How much lower do the backgrounds need to go for the 50/35/20 mas spaxel scales to be acceptable for NGAO science? How critical is the 100 mas spaxel scale for science? This mode in OSIRIS was not designed for science initially and as a result it was allowed to have an oversized pupil stop, and therefore a correspondingly large thermal background. It also has a reduced resolution (R ~3000) compared to the other plate scales.