Cycle 1 Planning Process B-G Andersson (SOFIA Science Operations Manager) & Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC, May 11, 2011 Mountain View.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Universities Space Research Association User Tools for Cycle 1 Phase II: SOFIA Spot R. Y. Shuping DCS Development Lead L. Lin DCS Engineer J. Rho Associate.
Advertisements

Online Postgraduate Admissions Update for Postgraduate Forum – 22 January 2010 Kate Ward.
1 AAO AusGO : 29 June 2009 Demystifying the Queue at Gemini Observatory AAO Epping - 29 June 2009 Henry Lee Gemini South, Chile.
OJJDP Performance Measurement Training 1 Incorporating Performance Measurement in the Formula Grant RFP and Application Format Presenter: Pat Cervera,
All rights reserved © Altec ExoMars 2018 Rover Operations Control Centre Plans for rover operations training at ROCC M. Cinato.
1 HST Cycle 12 TAC Results Bob Williams TIPS – 17 April 2003.
CXC Response to June 04 Report 1.Bakeout Status: Paul Plucinsky 2.CIAO upgrade information: Jonathan McDowell 3.DS9 and visualization scripts: Jonathan.
1 Universities Space Research Association SSC Meeting January, 2007 User Tools for Cycle 1 Phase I: Proposal Preparation and Submission R. Y. Shuping.
2012 JANUARY Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
SOFIA DCS History and Overview Ian Gatley. SOFIA March DCS Preliminary Design Review2 The South Pole CARA Project: A DCS demonstration A data.
Chandra Users’ Committee, Oct 2006 Chandra Director’s Office Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 8  725 submitted proposals  *6.4 oversubscribed.
SOFIA SSSC Program Status Robert Meyer Program Manager September 29, 2009.
A Handful of Topics. P200 Constituencies We re-negotiated our partnership agreements in CY2009 Long-standing partners JPL and Cornell are continuing as.
1 Universities Space Research Association SOFIA Program Options SSSC 18 February 2010 Mina Cappuccio SOFIA Science Project Manager NASA Ames Research Center.
Policy and Procedures Highlights.  STAAR A  STAAR Alternate 2  Changes to Math Assessments  Changes to Writing Assessments  Standardized Oral Administration.
Senior Review Evaluations (1 of 5) Proposals due: 6 March 2015 Panel evaluations: Week of 22 April 2015 Performance factors to be evaluated will include.
Science Operations Status Maria Santos-Lleo EPIC cal & ops meeting, Madrid March, 2010.
SOFIA — The Observatory open cavity (door not shown) TELESCOPE pressure bulkhead scientific instrument (1 of 7) Scientist work stations, telescope and.
REGIONAL PEER REVIEW PANELS (PRP) August Peer Review Panel: Background  As a requirement of the ESEA waiver, ODE must establish a process to ensure.
LCG Milestones for Deployment, Fabric, & Grid Technology Ian Bird LCG Deployment Area Manager PEB 3-Dec-2002.
October Prop K Strategic Plan & 5-Year Prioritization Programs Presentation to the Citizens Advisory Committee October 24, 2007.
1 R. D. Gehrz 66th International Symposium on Molecular Spectroscopy, Columbus, OH, June 23, 2011 The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy.
SSSC 02/18/2010 P. Marcum Science Utilization Policies SOFIA SCIENCE UTILIZATION POLICIES Pamela M. Marcum SOFIA Project Scientist SSSC Feb 19, 2010.
The full electromagnetic spectrum …. Temperature determines the main type of radiation emitted … (left to right: Compton, Chandra, Hubble, and Spitzer.
Software Engineering Management Lecture 1 The Software Process.
State Board of Education Meeting Race to the Top Update August 1, RTTT3 Overview Allocation of Funds (State and District) State-Level Activities.
1/11/2011AAS SOFIA splinter (Seattle, WA) 1. 1/11/2011AAS SOFIA splinter (Seattle, WA) 2 SOFIA Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy 2.7-meter.
John Peoples for the DES Collaboration BIRP Review August 12, 2004 Tucson1 DES Management  Survey Organization  Survey Deliverables  Proposed funding.
MWA Operations Management Plan (OMP, v. 3) Ron Remillard (MIT); MWA Project Meeting, June 6, 2011.
1 R. D. Gehrz 64th International Symposium on Molecular Spectroscopy, Columbus, OH, June 23, 2009 The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy.
Folie 1 > SSSC/SITR Meeting, NASA-ARC > September 28/29, 2009 > D. Lilienthal SSSC/SITR Meeting NASA-ARC, September 28/29, 2009 Dietmar Lilienthal, DLR.
1 R. D. Gehrz 67th International Symposium on Molecular Spectroscopy, Columbus, OH, June 21, 2012 The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy.
ESPON Seminar 4-5 December 2013 in Vilnius Last steps of ESPON 2013 And towards ESPON 2020.
GLAST Science Support CenterAugust 9, 2004 Users’ Committee Meeting GSSC USER SUPPORT David Band – GSSC.
SSC SI Data Processing Pipeline Plans Tom Stephens USRA Information Systems Development Manager SSSC Meeting – Sept 29, 2009.
Obs. Planning Workshop 22 July 2011 NASA Herschel Science Center - page 1 PACS David R. Ardila NHSC-HSC liaison The OT2 Call.
May 17, 2004SSWG - PFIS Shared Risk1 PFIS Commissioning, Shared Risk, and Transition to Operations.
XMM 1Norbert Schartel Report From The Project Scientist Presentation for the XMM-Newton Users Group Meeting VI 19 th / 20 th May 2005 Norbert Schartel.
GO Program: Cycle 1 process, results, and Cycle 2 schedule Koji Mukai Astro-E2 Guest Observer Facility.
Data Management Plan for KORUS-AQ Airborne Field Study Dr. Jeong-Hoo Park National Institute of Environmental Research Dr. Gao Chen NASA Langley Research.
1 Proposal and Observation Handling Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC May 11, 2011.
GLAST Science Support Center June 21, 2007 Getting Involved with GLAST GLAST Guest Investigator Program David Band, GSSC CRESST/GSFC/UMBC.
2011 Calendar Important Dates/Events/Homework. SunSatFriThursWedTuesMon January
GLAST Science Support Center November 17, 2006 GUC Face-to-Face Meeting GLAST GI Program (with revised schedule) David Band, GSSC.
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.
1 HIPO Trimester Review Status Report Ted Dunham Lowell Observatory 28 April, 2009.
Why is the VLT very efficient? Fernando Comerón On behalf of Francesca Primas and Martino Romaniello.
1 Universities Space Research Association Martin Ruzek SSSC February 18, 2010 FIFI LS EOOP Extended Observing Opportunity Program Operating FIFI LS in.
NASA Herschel Science Center - page 1 PACS NHSC Cycle 1 Open Time Proposal Planning Workshop 3-4 June 2010 ESA AO and NASA Funding Call Phil Appleton and.
1 Universities Space Research Association Science Instrument Pipeline Requirements SSSC 2009 September 29 Erick Young Director SOFIA Science Mission Operat.
Near-term schedule Scott Horner. Background MCCS software engineering build #3 was delivered in June and tested by the SIL team in early July A number.
HSC Queue Mode Implementation Plan ~ Stage I, II, III ~ Tae-Soo Pyo Subaru Telescope /01/15.
July 2007 SundayMondayTuesdayWednesdayThursdayFridaySaturday
1 Mission preparation Fred Lahuis SRON / Leiden Observatory MIRI NL Meeting ASTRON, 3 th June 2010.
Science Operation of Subaru Telescope Tae-Soo Pyo 2014.Feb.25 2/25/ Subaru Winter KASI.
SOFIA Program Status Bob Meyer January 10, 2010 Program Manager.
Effectiveness of Contingency Flights
Software Engineering Management
JWST Science Policy & Science Parallels
SOFIA — The Observatory
Draft thoughts on selecting LSST DDFs
ALMA Cycle 5 Hiroshi Nagai (NAOJ).
Entry Capacity Overrun price calculation
ESO Phase 1 & 2 Procedures Gaitee Hussain
Science Policies and Timeline
Systems Analysis and Design
February 2007 Note: Source:.
2015 January February March April May June July August September
Presentation transcript:

Cycle 1 Planning Process B-G Andersson (SOFIA Science Operations Manager) & Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC, May 11, 2011 Mountain View

Cycle 1

Cycle 1 Layout The SMO desires to start one-year cycles with the next proposal call. –Calls in October, observations start in July Discussions are on-going about coordinating US and German calls. Cycle 1 observations run –from July 1, 2012 –to June 30, According to the Lego ® charts (March 29, 2011) there will be 4 observing windows in Cycle 1: –Aug/Sep RHfollowing FORCAST commissioning –Nov/Dec RHfollowing FLITECAM commissioning –March RHfollowing EXES commissioning –May RHfollowing FIFI-LS commissioning

Segment 3 4 Observing Flights Instrumentation Commissioning Platform Flights Aircraft maintenance / Observatory upgrade FOC September 25, 2012 Heading Turner TA Improvements? OBDMA Ground Cooling SATCOM installation TA Improvements? WVM Upgrade TA Improvements? 2 week southern hemisphere deployment Research Hours CY2012 – 245 CY2013 – 640 CY2014 – 836 SS3SO 7/13/12 RSSO 9/8/14 IMS Reference: SOFIA_IMS110404JP.mpp Created April 4th, 2011 Cycle 1 starts Cycle 1 ends

OctNovDecJanMarFebJunJulAprMay GI Phase II Proposal Call Open TAC Review SMO activities Flight Planning Flights OctNovDecJanMarFebJunJulAprMay

Basic Science: Lessons Learned

Basic Science: Objectives, Ground Rules The goal: demonstrate the scientific promise of SOFIA while it was still in the development stage. The observations would be shared risk (among GIs, the SMO and Instrument teams). There would be a limited observing window. Effective oversubscription of accepted targets would be expected. The planning resources would be limited. The instruments would not have been fully commissioned.

Basic Science Proposal Review The Basic Science TAC ranked the proposals and divided them into three categories: –Must Do. –Do if time is available. (Only the highest ranked ones were accepted.) –Do not do. The SMO Director instructed Flight Planners to give the “Must Do” programs highest priority. –For Basic Science 1 (FORCAST) 90% of the time requested for “Must Do” targets has been scheduled; the fraction is 17% for “do if time is available” targets. –The Basic Science 1 flight plans have an average science efficiency (targets + calibrators) of 84%. The overhead rates for FORCAST observations were not known before the Short Science I series in December 2010.

Basic Science - Scheduling Issues Flight planning was highly constrained due to the short total time- span and limited number of flights. Program-internal target prioritization was generally not considered, due to scheduling constraints. Flight Planning would be easier for full-year cycles where objects can be observed rising or setting. The non-uniform sky distribution of targets made flight planning challenging. Shifts in schedule can drop targets from visibility windows

Cycle 1: Instruments

Instrument Use Pre-Commissioning FORCAST & GREAT will be used extensively during Basic Science –L1, L2 for GREAT –Imaging mode for FORCAST, but not grisms FLITECAM will be used in imaging mode during TA V&V flights in late –The Call for Proposals will not incorporate the lessons learned from those flights. However, they would inform updates to other documentation such as the Observers’ Handbook. HIPO will be commissioned (de facto) in EXES and FIFI-LS will be on SOFIA for the first time only during their commissioning runs, in February and April 2013, respectively.

Instrument availability in Cycle 1 Which instruments should be offered? What modes will be available for each instrument? Which modes need to be offered as “shared risk”? Should some instruments/modes be offered with the restriction that is currently applied to “Special Purpose Principal Investigator-class Science Instruments” (SSIs) - i.e. consultation with the instrument PI is required before submitting a proposal? What resources are required/available (both internal and from Instrument teams)?

Instruments & Modes for Cycle I Instrument/ModeSUPShared RiskSSI mode FORCAST imaging ✔ FORCAST grism ✔ GREAT Low ✔ GREAT medium ✔ FLITECAM imaging ✔ FLITECAM grism ✔ HIPO ✔ “SUP” – according to the SOFIA Science Utilization Policy. “Shared Risk” – as in Basic Science; outcomes, specifications not guaranteed. “SSI mode” – Endorsement from Instrument PI required before proposing (note: HIPO is an SSI instrument).

Cycle 1: Proposals

New Categories of Proposals Snapshot/Survey Proposals Target lists where there is no requirement/guarantee that any particular one will be observed. The proposals will be judged on scientific merit. Accepted proposals in this category would provide a pool of targets that can be used to fill in flight-legs, which otherwise would be “dead-legs”. Target of Opportunity (ToO) Proposals Director’s Discretionary Time After FOC (late September 2012), up to 7% of the time may be allocated by the SMO Director.

Guaranteed Time (GT) During Cycle 1 Guaranteed Time allotments need to be restrained –If all instruments commissioned during Cycle 1 requested all their guaranteed time right away, it would consume 47% of the Cycle 1 time. Flight series planning requires GT/GI balance –Flights will be reserved for GT at the same time as instrument series are scheduled. Reserved Observation Catalogs issued for each call –Includes all instruments offered in the call. –Includes as much or all of their allotted time (including overheads specified by the SMO). –Can be revised only after the Proposal Cycle selections are made (i.e during “green periods”).

Guaranteed Time “Green Periods: