1. A global approach to ELT instrument developments J.-G. Cuby for the French ELT WG

2. FP7 “The construction of an Extremely Large Telescope on a competitive time scale will be addressed by radical strategic planning…” (Council resolution)  Calls for a schedule compatible with other projects, TMT, GMT, ALMA, JWST, etc. –Assume 2016  Calls for forefront instrumentation –Key to science, e.g. the VLT success Reverse schedule: FP7 (2008-2012) in parallel with the instrument study No time left for generic studies for the first generation instruments  First / Main instruments need to be started NOW (2-4 years of demonstration) ELT Instruments: timeline

3. A key word: demonstration Some concepts for workhorse ELT instruments remain to be demonstrated –E.g. MOAO, XAO instruments Demonstration requires focused and integrated studies at system level –Science Top Level Requirements, Simulations, Simulators, Data Reduction, etc. –Adaptive Optics TLRs, Simulations feeding science, AO system analysis, tests on existing systems, etc. –Instrumentation TLRs, concepts, interfaces with AO, at least 2 prototyping cycles, etc. –System Putting it all together, budgets, etc. –Demonstrators, either in lab (e.g. AO benches) or on-sky (e.g. VLT) Synergy with transverse AO developments –Requirements –Interfaces Synergy with telescope developments –Interfaces: focal plane, f ratio, back focal distance, platforms, ADCs, field of view (scientific & technical), LGS, etc.

4. A key word: demonstration Demonstration by: –Study (simulations, concepts, etc.) –Prototypes –Demonstrators (benches, on-sky, etc.) Demonstrations on existing infrastructures (e.g. VLT) for the next infrastructures –Develop new demonstrators in lab or on sky –Use existing or planned instruments as demonstrators (e.g. SPHERE) Structuring activity –Teams with various competence, etc –Access to lab, possibly sky, demonstrators –Networks highly desirable, e.g. for the science activities FP7: ideal for the demonstration phase – until instrument FDR (~ 2012) –JRAs, networks, access (to demonstrators)

5. Examples WFSPEC, MOMFIS etc. –‘High-z’ and mass assembly of galaxies Complex To be demonstrated (MOAO) Major interface aspects with telescope and AO, etc.

6. Examples MOMFIS WFSPEC WBS for the Instrument study Demonstrators

7. Example: MOMFIS / WFSPEC demonstration Potential Participants: F, UK, I, tbd. Timescale: 2008-2012 for the bulk of the activities Cost: ~ 8 M€ all inclusive (included in N. Hubin’s presentation) Deliverables: reports, conceptual studies, several prototypes (hw & sw), Demonstrators (1 bench, 1 VLT) Industrial dimension: interest in short term applied R&D EU dimension: use of existing infrastructures, demonstration for future infrastructures, structuring activity, synergy with ELT Design Study

8. EPICS A Planet Finder instrument for the European ELT (slides from J.-L. Beuzit)

9. EPICS Design philosophy General approach -> Integrated concept  Science-driven: detection of exoplanets  Very detailed system analysis  Lessons learned from SPHERE on VLT (as demonstrator)  Globally optimized instrument (AO, corono, focal WFS control, observing modes)  Open concept, explore several options (corono, IFS...)  Settle on well-established competences distributed in the XAO community  Extensive simulations -> end-to-end model  Prototyping, validations, test benches, demosntrator

10. EPICS Design Strategy Spatially Filtered SH Advanced PYR Experiments Simulations FP6 Point design Simulations experiments EPICS System Dimensioning Prototypes Conceptual & Preliminary Design Reviews HOT extension Aggressive Calibration & Post-processing Active suppression of Systematic speckles Theory SPHERE feedback

11. Conclusions FP7 to support the design phase of E-ELT instruments in period 2008-2012 (JRAs, network & access) Global approach to instrument developments highly desirable –Better focus, better synergy –Allows smaller (integrated) teams –Higher efficiency, faster Structuring activity Not exclusive of transverse / generic activities –Activities in essence transverse, e.g. detectors, etc. –Upfront activities with longer development timescales Synergy with ELT DS –Instrumentation currently severely under funded Which call ? Preparatory phase or I3 ?