Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Allocation per cycle: 700 ks Carry-forward (from Cycles 13-16): 894 ks

Published byCory Rogers Modified over 6 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Allocation per cycle: 700 ks Carry-forward (from Cycles 13-16): 894 ks"— Presentation transcript:

1 Allocation per cycle: 700 ks Carry-forward (from Cycles 13-16): 894 ks
DDT Summary: Oct 2015-Sept 2016 Cycle # Proposals Accepted Exposure Time ks Rejected 17 20 577 11 441 16 23 676 327 Allocation per cycle: 700 ks Carry-forward (from Cycles 13-16): 894 ks CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

2 Director’s Discretionary Time (most recent first)
Target Source type PI Name Exp. (ks) #Obs Instr't Proptry CXOU J IMBH Earnshaw 35 1 ACIS-S N Proxima Cen Star Wargelin 45 3 HRC-I SMC X-3 HXRB/PSR Coe 40 2 D SWIFTJ Transient Kennea ACIS-I PSRJ PWN Blumer 60 FO Aqr Int. Polar Kennedy 18 XMMUJ Be/XRB Vasilopoulos 25 SGR Magnetar Kouveliotou 20 Gaia16apd SL SN Yan 1E NS Rea 47 SN2016bkv SN IIn Patnaude 15 HETEJ Degenaar 30 Slowest rotation (6.67 hr) magnetar known Paper and Press Release CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

3 Director’s Discretionary Time (cont)
Target Source type PI Name Exp. ks #Obs Instr't Proptry M87 AGN Cheung 25 5 ACIS-S N QSO Lensed AGN Pooley 30 1 SN2005ip SN Mauerhan 36 MWC560 XRB (Symb) Lucy 50 2 D Mrk1018 Tremblay PSRJ PSR/XRB Ho ASASSN16at SN IIP Grupe HD97658 Exoplanet Wheatley 40 FRB121102 FRB Scholz SMC X-2 PSR Li 2.8 HRC-S 5*5ks observations: monitor + ID source of TeV flare CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

4 NASA Senior Review 2016 Proposal: submitted in January 2016: “delta” - 20 page update, companion to SR2014 proposal Panel questions: received and addressed,~ week before review: >20 pages of responses Panel review: OCC, March 2016 Program: 3 hours of presentations (core,MP,CSC), OCC tour, discussion and questions Panel report: very positive 6 (of 26) “findings” had associated action Responses to actions: delivered to NASA 29 Aug 2016 CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

5 CXC Response to SR2016 Actions
F9: Transfer of Archive to HEASARC: The panel believes that a detailed plan for the transfer of the Chandra data archive to the NASA HEASARC is not warranted at this time but the project does need to look ahead and record their concepts for completing the archive. Response: The CXC is updating to the Chandra Project Data Management Plan (PDMP) that will provide sufficient detail to propose for transfer of the Chandra archive to HEASARC during the close-out period of the CXC extension proposal. Already in progress. F12: Release of Second Chandra Source Catalog: The continued development of the Chandra X-ray Source Catalog with future observations will provide the scientific community with a powerful tool for enhanced scientific return. Response: Production of the second release of the Chandra Source Catalog (CSC2) is in process and is expected to be complete before the next Senior Review. Report came out of the Operations Review CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

6 CXC Response to SR2016 Actions (cont)
F14: Reallocation of time for Large Programs: The CXC team discontinued the X-ray Visionary Programs (XVPs) and increased the minimum amount of time required for Large Programs from 300ks to 400ks. We believe it is important for the Director to continue assessing the effectiveness of the peer review structure and adjust upcoming calls for proposals based on that assessment in consultation with the CUC and input from the community. Response: Assessing the allocation of observing time among the various programs announced in the call for proposals is a standard process for each peer review. MSFC Chandra Program Office and the Chandra X-ray Center will discuss any proposed changes with the CUC and report changes and their consequences to the next Senior Review. CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

7 CXC Response to SR2016 Actions (cont)
F24: GO budget: The panel believes that the GO budget is falling behind with inflation and needs to be increased. There should be ways to increase this budget to insure continued high scientific output. Response: We agree that the essentially flat GO budget, which has increased very little in nominal dollars over the mission, has resulted in a substantial erosion of buying power for grantees. We will propose for an increase in the GO budget through the PPBE process. F25: GTO Time: While recognizing the essential expertise and experience provided by the Instrument Teams for maintaining a highly productive and well calibrated observatory, we reiterate the concerns of the 2010, 2012 and 2014 Senior Review panels regarding the continuing allocation of 2.45 Ms/yr of GTO time, now more than 15 years after launch. Response: It is our understanding that, following consideration of a similar recommendation by the 2014 SRC, NASA Headquarters determined that the GTO time was an ongoing commitment to the Instrument Principal Investigator teams. We will provide information or other support to Headquarters in any future consideration of this matter. CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

8 CXC Response to SR2016 Actions (cont)
F26: Primary Mission Objectives (PMOs): The PMOs were generically defined and not specific to Chandra; in future reviews, the inclusion of PMOs written with specific metrics to measure success could serve as a useful tool for strategic planning Response: We have developed new, more detailed, PMOs to guide our efforts going forward to the next Senior Review: PMO-1: Continue Chandra’s scientific excellence and impact in accord with top level NASA goals. PMO-1.1: Conduct community-driven science PMO-1.2: Enhance Chandra science by optimizing observing and proposal opportunities PMO-2: Enable the science community by providing complete, well-calibrated science data products and analysis tools and by making Chandra data and documentation available worldwide PMO-2.1: Release an enhanced and expanded Chandra Source Catalog PMO-2.2: Create, distribute and maintain advanced data analysis software tools CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

9 CXC Response to SR2016 Actions (cont)
PMO-2.3: Provide Chandra data to observers in less than 2 days, and expand the Chandra data archive PMO-2.4: Maintain the calibration of Chandra’s instruments to better than 5% PMO-3: Ensure the health, safety and productivity of the Observatory PMO-3.1: Maximize Chandra’s high observing efficiency despite increasing thermal and spacecraft challenges, to maximize the Observatory’s scientific PMO-3.2: Employ managerial and technical resources to maximize the lifetime of the Chandra Observatory CUC: 27 Sept Director’s Report

Download ppt "Allocation per cycle: 700 ks Carry-forward (from Cycles 13-16): 894 ks"

Similar presentations

Building a Strategic Management System Office for Student Affairs, Twin Cities Campus Ground Level Work Metrics Initiatives Managing Change Change Management.

Building a Strategic Management System Office for Student Affairs, Twin Cities Campus Ground Level Work Metrics Initiatives Managing Change Change Management.
Program Management Office (PMO) Design

Program Management Office (PMO) Design
CUC 22-23 Oct 2013 Chandra Director’s Office Cycle 15 Peer Review  18-21 June 2013, Hilton Logan Airport  No major changes in Cycle 15  13 topical panels,

CUC Oct 2013 Chandra Director’s Office Cycle 15 Peer Review  June 2013, Hilton Logan Airport  No major changes in Cycle 15  13 topical panels,
Preliminary management plan for PACE SDT What are the Goals of PACE? The goals of the PACE mission are: 1-Extend key climate data records on ocean color.

Preliminary management plan for PACE SDT What are the Goals of PACE? The goals of the PACE mission are: 1-Extend key climate data records on ocean color.
May 17, 2006 1 Capabilities Description of a Rapid Prototyping Capability for Earth-Sun System Sciences RPC Project Team Mississippi State University.

May 17, Capabilities Description of a Rapid Prototyping Capability for Earth-Sun System Sciences RPC Project Team Mississippi State University.
Chandra Users’ Committee CXC Manager’s Status Report For the period October 08 – March 09 Roger Brissenden CXC Manager 06 April 2008.

Chandra Users’ Committee CXC Manager’s Status Report For the period October 08 – March 09 Roger Brissenden CXC Manager 06 April 2008.
Chandra Users’ Committee CXC Manager’s Status Report For the period April 08 – September 08 Roger Brissenden CXC Manager 15 October 2008.

Chandra Users’ Committee CXC Manager’s Status Report For the period April 08 – September 08 Roger Brissenden CXC Manager 15 October 2008.
Chandra Users’ Committee, 29-30 Oct 2009 Chandra Director’s Office Cycle 11 Peer Review Proposal Numbers:  668 submitted proposals  *5.6 oversubscribed.

Chandra Users’ Committee, Oct 2009 Chandra Director’s Office Cycle 11 Peer Review Proposal Numbers:  668 submitted proposals  *5.6 oversubscribed.
Chandra Users' Committee, 27 April 2010 Chandra Director’s Office Cycle 12  CfP Release: Dec 15 2009  GTO Deadline: 11 March 2010  GO Deadline: 18 March.

Chandra Users' Committee, 27 April 2010 Chandra Director’s Office Cycle 12  CfP Release: Dec  GTO Deadline: 11 March 2010  GO Deadline: 18 March.
Chandra Users’ Committee, 17-18 Oct 2006 Chandra Director’s Office Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 8  725 submitted proposals  *6.4 oversubscribed.

Chandra Users’ Committee, Oct 2006 Chandra Director’s Office Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 8  725 submitted proposals  *6.4 oversubscribed.
CXC Manager’s Status Report Chandra User Committee Meeting Roger J. Brissenden 25 June 2002.

CXC Manager’s Status Report Chandra User Committee Meeting Roger J. Brissenden 25 June 2002.
Director's Office Chandra Users’ Committee, 19-20 Sept 2007 Chandra Cycle 9  661 submitted proposals  *5.5 oversubscribed (based on time)  48 LP, 10.

Director's Office Chandra Users’ Committee, Sept 2007 Chandra Cycle 9  661 submitted proposals  *5.5 oversubscribed (based on time)  48 LP, 10.
NSF Data Management Plan Requirements Alex Kanous

NSF Data Management Plan Requirements Alex Kanous
Chandra Users’ Committee, 15-16 Oct 2008 Chandra Director’s Office Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 10  639 submitted proposals  *5.6 oversubscribed.

Chandra Users’ Committee, Oct 2008 Chandra Director’s Office Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 10  639 submitted proposals  *5.6 oversubscribed.
CXC Chandra Users' Committee Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 8 725 proposals *6.4 oversubscribed (based on time) GTO for review: due 3 rd April.

CXC Chandra Users' Committee Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle proposals *6.4 oversubscribed (based on time) GTO for review: due 3 rd April.
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.

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.
CXC Manager’s Status Report Chandra Users’ Committee Meeting Edward M. Mattison 29 June 2004.

CXC Manager’s Status Report Chandra Users’ Committee Meeting Edward M. Mattison 29 June 2004.
CXC Implementing 2007 NRC Portals of the Universe Report Chandra X-ray Center Recommended Best Practices Roger Brissenden and Belinda Wilkes 25 April 2012.

CXC Implementing 2007 NRC Portals of the Universe Report Chandra X-ray Center Recommended Best Practices Roger Brissenden and Belinda Wilkes 25 April 2012.
SSSC 02/18/2010 P. Marcum Science Utilization Policies SOFIA SCIENCE UTILIZATION POLICIES Pamela M. Marcum SOFIA Project Scientist SSSC Feb 19, 2010.

SSSC 02/18/2010 P. Marcum Science Utilization Policies SOFIA SCIENCE UTILIZATION POLICIES Pamela M. Marcum SOFIA Project Scientist SSSC Feb 19, 2010.
IXYZ Frank Marshall NASA/GSFC 25 April 2012 April 25, 20121Implementing Portals of the Universe.

IXYZ Frank Marshall NASA/GSFC 25 April 2012 April 25, 20121Implementing Portals of the Universe.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google