Hubble Space Telescope Call for Proposals for Cycle 13
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| Hubble Space Telescope Call for Proposals for Cycle 13 | |||||
| ||||||
3.1 Overview of Proposal CategoriesChapter 3:
Proposal Categories
3.2 General Observer (GO) Proposals
3.2.1 Regular GO Programs
3.2.2 Large GO Programs
3.2.3 Long-Term GO Programs
3.2.4 Treasury GO Programs
3.3 Snapshot (SNAP) Proposals
3.3.1 Characteristics of SNAPs
3.3.2 Guidelines for SNAP Proposals
3.4 Archival Research (AR) Proposals
3.4.1 Regular AR Proposals
3.4.2 Legacy AR Proposals
3.4.3 Guidelines for AR Proposals
3.4.4 Suggestions for AR Proposals
3.5 Theory Proposals
3.6 Calibration Proposals
3.7 Joint HST-Chandra Observing Proposals
3.8 Joint HST-NOAO Observing Proposals
3.9 Director's Discretionary (DD) Time Proposals
3.10 Guaranteed Time Observer Programs
3.1 Overview of Proposal Categories
HST observations can be requested with a General Observer (GO; see Section 3.2) or a Snapshot (SNAP; see Section 3.3) proposal. A GO program can be either a Regular GO (see Section 3.2.1), a Large GO (see Section 3.2.2), a Long-term GO (see Section 3.2.3), or a Treasury program (see Section 3.2.4). Funding for projects that do not require new HST observations can be requested with an Archival Research (AR; see Section 3.4) or a Theory (see Section 3.5) proposal. An AR program can be either a Regular AR (see Section 3.4.1) or a Legacy AR (see Section 3.4.2) program. A special proposal type exists for Calibration Programs (see Section 3.6). Proposals for HST observations can also request observing time on Chandra (see Section 3.7) or NOAO facilities (see Section 3.8). At any time scientists can request Director's Discretionary (DD) time for unanticipated and scientifically compelling astronomical observations (see Section 3.9). U.S. Investigators with approved proposals are strongly encouraged to submit an associated Education/Public Outreach (E/PO) Proposal (see Chapter 11).
3.2 General Observer (GO) Proposals
A GO proposal may be submitted for any amount of HST observing time, counted in terms of HST orbits. Chapter 6 of the HST Primer describes how the required number of orbits can be calculated for a particular set of observations. Programs that require fewer than 100 orbits are called Regular Programs (see Section 3.2.1), and those that require 100 or more orbits are called Large Programs (see Section 3.2.2). Programs in these categories can request observing time in future cycles when this is scientifically justified (see Section 3.2.3). The additional category of Treasury Programs (see Section 3.2.4) was started in Cycle 11 to stimulate certain types of ambitious and innovative proposals that may not naturally fit in the Regular or the Large Program categories.
Large and Treasury proposals will be evaluated by the TAC (see Section 6.1.2), which can award up to a total of approximately 1000 orbits to proposals in these categories (approximately 1/3 of the total time anticipated to be available in Cycle 13).
Proposers of large programs should note that all HST observations are accepted with the understanding that the timescale on which the observations will actually be obtained will depend on scheduling opportunities and demands on HST resources. Experience has shown that large programs with scheduling constraints may require execution over an extended period.
In recent cycles the acceptance rate of submitted GO programs has been approximately independent of size. In general, proposals are either accepted or rejected in their entirety. Accordingly, you are urged to request the actual number of orbits required to achieve your science goals.
3.2.1 Regular GO Programs
Regular GO Programs are programs that request 99 orbits or less.
3.2.2 Large GO Programs
Large GO Programs are programs that request 100 orbits or more.
Large programs should lead to a clear advance in our understanding in an important area of astronomy. They must use the unique capabilities of HST to address scientific questions in a comprehensive approach that is not possible in smaller time allocations. Selection of a Large Program for implementation does not rule out acceptance of smaller projects to do similar science, but target duplication and overall program balance will be considered.
Proposers submitting Large programs are asked to include additional technical detail in the "Description of the Observations" section to provide information on the scheduling aspects of their program. Investigators interested in proposing Treasury/Large programs are encouraged to consult the Treasury/Large Program User Information Report (available on the Cycle 13 Announcement Page), which provides general information concerning how these programs are scheduled and summarizes technical and scheduling information that is important for these programs.
A goal in Cycle 13 is to select several programs in the 100-300 orbit range. For comparison, in Cycle 12 eight Large programs were accepted for a total of 440 primary and 500 pure parallel orbits. Descriptions of these programs are available on the HST Treasury/Large/Legacy Programs Web Page.
3.2.3 Long-Term GO Programs
Regular and Large GO Programs may request HST observing time for more than one cycle.
Long-term programs require a long time baseline, but not necessarily a large number of HST orbits, in order to achieve their science goals. Examples include astrometric observations or long-term monitoring of variable stars or active galactic nuclei.
You may request time in as many as three observing cycles (i.e., Cycles 13, 14 and 15), but you cannot request instruments other than those presently offered in Cycle 13. Long-term proposals should describe the entire requested program and provide a cycle-by-cycle breakdown of the number of orbits requested. The scientific justification for allocating time beyond Cycle 13 should be presented in detail. For long-term programs, it is the sum of all orbits requested for Cycles 13, 14 and 15 that determines whether the program is Large or Regular. Note that we expect to replace WFPC2 during SM4.
The Cycle 13 Review Panels and TAC will be able to award limited amounts of time to Long-Term Programs for Cycles 14 and 15. GOs with approved Long-Term Programs need not submit continuation proposals in the subsequent Cycles (and hence, GOs who had Cycle 13 time approved in Cycles 11 or 12 do not have to submit a Phase I continuation proposal, although a new Phase II submission will be required).
3.2.4 Treasury GO Programs
Starting in Cycle 11, the opportunities for large-scale research with HST were expanded with the introduction of the Hubble Treasury Program. It allows proposals for datasets of lasting value to the HST program that should be obtained before HST ceases operations. A Treasury Program is defined by the following characteristics:
- The project should focus on the potential to solve multiple scientific problems with a single, coherent dataset. It should enable a variety of compelling scientific investigations.
- Enhanced data products are desirable to add value to the data. Examples are reduced images, object catalogs, or collaborative observations on other facilities (for which funding can be provided). Funding for the proposed data products will depend on their timely availability, as negotiated with the STScI Director. They should be delivered to STScI in suitable digital formats for further dissemination via the HST Data Archive or related channels.
- Data taken under the Treasury program will have no proprietary period (see Section 5.1), although brief proprietary periods may be requested, if they will enhance the public data value.
The following additional characteristics are particularly encouraged:
- Development of new techniques for observing or data reduction.
- Creation and dissemination of tools (software, web interfaces, models, etc.) for the scientific community to work with the data products.
- Inclusion of an Education/Public Outreach component. (Note that a Phase I Treasury Proposal need only summarize the planned E/PO component briefly; typically, one paragraph at the end of the Scientific Justification section. A detailed E/PO proposal should be submitted later as discussed in Chapter 11).
The emphasis in Cycle 13 remains on observations whose value is maximal if taken soon. For example, the on-orbit degradation of CCD detectors means that deep observations with ACS are of most value when obtained early in its lifetime.
Treasury programs may request observing time to be distributed in future cycles with appropriate justification (similar to the situation for Regular and Large GO programs; see Section 3.2.3). In addition, Treasury programs may request observing time in future cycles if the requested number of orbits is large enough to make implementation in a single cycle impractical or impossible.
Approximately 1/3 of the available HST observing time in upcoming cycles (approximately 1000 orbits per cycle) will be available to the combination of Large programs and Treasury Programs. For comparison, in Cycle 12 two Treasury Programs were accepted for a total of 464 primary orbits (with an additional 320 orbits in Cycle 13). The largest of these received 320 orbits in Cycle 12. Descriptions of these programs are also available on the HST Treasury/Large/Legacy Programs Web Page.
If scientifically justified, it is possible to propose a multi-cycle Treasury Program of order 1,000 orbits, with commensurate funding, to produce an enhanced dataset of high impact.
Selection of Treasury Programs will be handled by the TAC as part of the normal peer review process (see Section 6.1.2). Successful proposals will be reviewed by STScI to ensure observing efficiency. STScI resources may be made available to approved Treasury Programs by decision of the STScI Director. STScI reserves the right to conduct midterm progress reviews of Treasury Programs, to ensure that adequate progress is being made to achieve the goals of the project. Ongoing funding is contingent on the results of such reviews. For Treasury Programs above a certain cost threshold, STScI may require successful proposers to use professional project management personnel to aid the scientific team in such areas as planning, scheduling, budgeting, cost-control, and reporting.
Proposers submitting Treasury programs are asked to include additional technical detail in the "Description of the Observations" section to provide information on the scheduling aspects of their program. Investigators interested in proposing Treasury/Large programs are encouraged to consult the Treasury/Large Program User Information Report (available on the Cycle 13 Announcement Page), which provides general information concerning how these programs are scheduled and summarizes technical and scheduling information that is important for these programs.
Those interested in submitting a Treasury Proposal are encouraged to read the Hubble Second Decade Committee Treasury Program Report. The report sets out the main motivations for the Treasury Program. Following the recommendation of the HST Second Decade Committee and the recent external HST TAC review (J. Toomre, chair), the Institute Director is constituting a standing committee (Treasury Program Advisory Committee, TPAC) whose mission is to advise the Institute Director on the identification of topics for workshops to foster collaborations among interested parties and to promote discussion of science objectives and observing strategies for possible Treasury programs. As part of this process the Institute will organize workshops in the months before each annual TAC meeting to stimulate ideas, strategies, and collaborations for Treasury programs. Updates on the status of Cycle 13 will be posted on the STScI home web page, and should be visited periodically by all scientists interested in participating in Cycle 13 in any way.
Note also that the Treasury program is similar in spirit to, e.g., the SIRTF Legacy Program.
Treasury Proposals should be identified in the `Special Proposal Types' section of the proposal (see Section 8.10).
The `Scientific Justification' section of the proposal (see Section 9.1) should include a description of the scientific investigations that will be enabled by the final data products, and their importance. The `Description of the Observations' section of the proposal (see Section 9.2) should not only describe the proposed observations and plans for data analysis, but should also describe the data products that will be made available to STScI and the community, the method of dissemination, and a realistic time line.
3.3 Snapshot (SNAP) Proposals
Snapshot (SNAP) programs consist of separate, relatively short observations whose durations are usually limited to 45 minutes or less (including all overheads). During the process of optimizing the HST observing schedule, the scheduling algorithm occasionally finds short time intervals where it is impossible to schedule any exposures from the pool of accepted GO programs. In order to make the HST schedule more efficient, STScI has developed the capability to insert Snapshot exposures into these gaps on objects selected from a large list of available candidates.
3.3.1 Characteristics of SNAPs
Proposers request a specific number of Snapshot targets. If the proposal is approved, a specific number of targets is allocated. However, there is no guarantee that any individual target will actually be observed. SNAPs are placed on the schedule only after the observing sequence has been determined for the higher-priority GO targets. The number of observations actually executed depends on the availability of appropriate schedule gaps. In general, only a fraction of the sample targets will actually be observed. Typical completion rates are in the range from 30-70%. For STIS/MAMA SNAPs, the inability to schedule these observations during SAA-impacted orbits reduces the completion rate to about 20%. However, there is no commitment on the part of STScI to obtain any completion factor for Snapshot programs.
Nominally, SNAP programs terminate at the end of each cycle. However, they may be kept active, for scheduling efficiency reasons, for up to one additional cycle at decreased priority. In contrast to GO programs (see Section 3.2.3), SNAP programs cannot request observing time in future cycles.
In recent years there have been approximately 500-1000 Snapshot observations scheduled per year, but this could be different in Cycle 13 and depends on factors that are unknown at this time.
Investigators interested in proposing for SNAPs are encouraged to consult the SNAP User Information Report, which contains details on how SNAPs are scheduled, the rules pertaining to them, completion rates for recent cycles, and other useful information.
3.3.2 Guidelines for SNAP Proposals
Please consider the following when developing your SNAP Proposal:
- Your willingness to waive part, or all, of the proprietary data-rights period is included in the selection criteria (see Section 6.1).
- You need not give a complete list of all targets and their coordinates in your Phase I proposal. However, you must specify the number of targets, and unambiguously identify the targets (e.g., reference to target lists in papers, or give a detailed description of the target characteristics). SNAP exposures may not be used for targets of opportunity (see also Section 4.1.2).
- In the `Observation Summary' section of the proposal (see Section 8.15) you should provide a typical example of a snapshot exposure.
- Shorter duration snapshot observations have more scheduling opportunities than longer ones. While SNAP observations longer than 45 minutes (including all overhead times; e.g., guide-star acquisition, target acquisition and readout times) are not impossible, their probability of execution is small. The majority of executed SNAP observations are 30 minutes or less.
- SNAP observations should not be proposed with any special scheduling constraints (e.g., CVZ, timing requirements, or telescope orientation requirements). However, the special requirement
BETWEENmay be used in the Phase II Program in some circumstances; for details see the SNAP User Information Report.- A snapshot must not have any links to other snapshots (e.g., relative timing or orientation constraints), even if the snapshots are of the same source.
- A SNAP program may not contain identical observations of the same source in different visits, unless there is a scientific motivation for obtaining observations of the same source at different times (e.g., science programs that require monitoring or follow-up). In the latter case, multiple identical visits of the same source may be requested; they should be counted as multiple targets (e.g., 10 different snapshot visits of the same galaxy count as 10 targets). Due to the nature of snapshot programs, repeated observations are not guaranteed.
- Moving target snapshot programs are acceptable only if the timing requirements are at least one month duration. Moving target snapshots are not permitted with the MAMA detectors and targets interior to the orbit of Jupiter can be observed on gyro control only. Please note that timing constraints will reduce the chance of a target being scheduled.
- Both imaging and spectroscopic STIS/MAMA snapshots are allowed, but the combined total targets accepted from all programs will not exceed 300, with imaging targets limited to a total of 100, due to the target and field bright-object checking requirements. Variable STIS/MAMA snapshot targets must have well-defined MAXIMUM UV fluxes, which will be used for the bright-object checking. There are no restrictions on the numbers or variability of proposed STIS/CCD snapshot targets, which do not require bright-object checking and have a higher expected completion rate since they are not restricted to SAA-free orbits. Thus, use of the CCD NUV configurations should be considered instead of the MAMA NUV.
- In addition, STIS/MAMA snapshot proposals should be limited to one or a few straightforward configurations. Specifically, use of the NDQ filters is not allowed. Use of the 0.2X0.2 echelle aperture is recommended for first-order programs without a scientific long-slit requirement, in order to expedite the field screening process. Excessively complex STIS/MAMA snapshot targets, fields, or instrumental configurations may not be implemented in Phase II because of the limited resources available for bright-object checking, combined with the relatively low expected completion rate; if you are in doubt on this issue, contact the STScI Help Desk (see Section 1.5).
- SNAP programs with the ACS/SBC are not allowed.
- Programs that require both GO orbits and SNAP targets should be submitted as two separate proposals. The proposals should refer to each other so that the reviewers will be aware that the proposals are part of the same project. This allows you to ensure that some essential targets are observed (the GO program) with the rest of the targets being sampled statistically (the SNAP program).
- It is possible to assign relative priorities (high/medium/low) to approved snapshot targets within a program. Priorities can be assigned in the Phase II program (see Section 10.2), and need not be addressed in the Phase I proposal. See the SNAP User Information Report for details.
3.4 Archival Research (AR) Proposals
Observations in the HST Data Archive that are no longer proprietary (see Section 1.4.7) are available for analysis by interested scientists through direct retrieval (which is free and does not involve financial support). The HST Archival Research (AR) program can provide financial support for the analysis of the data. An AR proposal must request a specific amount of funding (see Section 8.6.3) and must provide a narrative that describes the proposed use of the funds (see Section 9.7). Detailed budgets are not requested in Phase I, but are due in Phase II only (as is the case for GO and SNAP proposals; see Chapter 12 for details). Proposals for AR funding are considered at the same time, and by the same reviewers, as proposals for observing time. Observing and AR proposals are compared competitively on the basis of scientific merit.
Only U.S. Investigators (as defined in Section 12.2) are eligible for funding of Archival Research.
An Archival Research proposal may be submitted by a non-U.S. PI if there are one or more U.S. CoIs who request funding.
HST has produced an extraordinary quantity of high-quality observations over its thirteen years in orbit. The category of Regular AR proposals (see Section 3.4.1) has existed for many cycles. To encourage fuller use of available data and to achieve the full potential of the Data Archive, the opportunities for large-scale archival research were expanded in Cycle 11 with the introduction of the category of Legacy AR proposals (Section 3.4.2).
3.4.1 Regular AR Proposals
The general goal of a Regular AR proposal is to analyze a subset of data from the HST Archive to address a specific scientific issue. The analysis must improve on the previous use(s) of the data, or the scientific questions that are being addressed must differ from those tackled by the original programs that obtained the data.
There is no limit to the amount of funding that may be requested for a Regular AR program. The majority of the awards in recent cycles have been under $100,000, with a median around $50,000. However, STScI actively encourages the submission of more ambitious AR programs for which larger amounts of funding may be justified. For reference, 41 Regular AR proposals were approved in Cycle 12.
An AR proposal will be considered to be a Regular AR proposal, unless it is identified in the `Special Proposal Types' section of the proposal (see Section 8.10) as a Legacy AR or Theory proposal.
3.4.2 Legacy AR Proposals
A Legacy AR project is defined by the following characteristics:
- The project should perform a homogeneous analysis of a well-defined subset of data in the HST Archive.
- The main goal should be to provide a homogeneous set of calibrated data and/or ancillary data products (catalogs, software tools, web interfaces etc.) to the scientific community.
- The results of the project should enable a variety of new and important types of scientific investigations.
The main difference between a Regular and a Legacy AR project is that the former aims at performing a specific scientific investigation, while the latter will in addition create data products and/or tools for the benefit of the community. While Legacy proposals will be judged primarily on the basis of scientific merit, the importance and broad applicability of the products produced by the Legacy program will be key features in judging the overall scientific merit of the proposal.
It is a strict requirement for Legacy AR proposals that the proposed data products be created and distributed to the community in a timely manner. Data products should also be delivered to STScI in suitable digital formats, to allow dissemination via the HST Data Archive or related channels.
It is anticipated that Legacy AR proposals will be larger in scope and requested funds than most Regular AR proposals. While there is no lower limit on the requested amount of funding, it is expected that most proposals will require at least $100,000, and possibly up to a few times more than this, to accomplish their goals. Commensurate with the expected scope, Legacy AR proposals are allowed to be multi-year projects, although this is not a requirement. Multi-year projects will be funded on a yearly basis, with continued funding beyond the first year subject to a performance review. Legacy AR proposals will be evaluated by the TAC (see Section 6.1.2) in conjunction with Large and Treasury GO programs (see Section 3.2.2 and Section 3.2.4).
For reference, four AR Legacy proposals were approved in Cycle 11 and none in Cycle 12. Descriptions of these programs are available on the HST Treasury/Large/Legacy Programs Web Page.
Legacy AR Proposals must be identified in the `Special Proposal Types' section of the proposal (see Section 8.10).
The `Scientific Justification' section of the proposal (see Section 9.1) should include a description of the scientific investigations that will be enabled by the final data products, and their importance. The `Analysis Plan' section of the proposal (see Section 9.6) should not only describe the plans for data analysis, but should also discuss the data products that will be made available to STScI and the community, the method of dissemination, and a realistic time line.
3.4.3 Guidelines for AR Proposals
Please consider the following when developing your AR Proposal:
- Any data that you wish to analyze must reside (or be expected to reside) in the Archive, and be released from proprietary rights, by the start of Cycle 13 (July 2004, nominally).
- Programs that require funding for Archival Research and also new observations should be submitted as two separate proposals: one requesting funding for the Archival Research, and the other proposing the new observations. The proposals should refer to each other so that the reviewers will be aware that the proposals are part of the same project.
- Investigators are allowed to submit an AR proposal to analyze data that was obtained in a previous GO program on which they were themselves PI or CoI, but only if the goals of the AR proposal differ significantly from those for which GO-funding was awarded previously.
- STScI encourages the submission of AR proposals that combine HST data with data from other space-missions or ground-based observatories, especially those data contained in the Multimission Archive at STScI(MAST). Also, STScI is actively participating in plans for a National Virtual Observatory (NVO), and any (pilot) programs that tie in with the NVO effort are particularly encouraged; see the Virtual Observatory Forum Web Page for information. Note however that HST data must form the primary focus of any AR proposal; requests for support of AR programs using data primarily from other missions should follow the guidelines in the appropriate NASA Research Announcements.
3.4.4 Suggestions for AR Proposals
STScI would like to point out in particular the following rich sources of information for Archival Research:
- The data obtained in the context of the HST Archival Pure Parallel Program (see Section 4.2.2).
- The data obtained for the Hubble Deep Field (HDF) and Hubble Deep Field-South (HDF-S).
- The data obtained in the context of the HST Treasury Programs. Descriptions of these programs are available on the HST Treasury/Large/Legacy Programs Web Page.
3.5 Theory Proposals
There is the opportunity under the HST Archival Research program to obtain support for theoretical research. Research that is primarily theoretical can have a lasting benefit for current or future observational programs with HST, and it is appropriate to propose theory programs with relevance to the HST mission. Recent trends in HST funding suggest that of order 5% of the total HST GO Funding might be used to support Theory Proposals.
A Theory proposal should address a topic that is of direct relevance to HST observational programs, and this relevance should be explained in the proposal. Funding of mission-specific research under the HST Theory Program will be favored over research that is appropriate for a general theory program (e.g., the NASA Office of Space Science Astrophysics Theory Program; ATP). The primary criterion for a Theory Proposal is that the results should enhance the value of HST observational programs through their broad interpretation (in the context of new models or theories) or by refining the knowledge needed to interpret specific observational results (a calculation of cross sections may fall under the latter category). The results of the theoretical investigation should be made available to the community in a timely fashion.
A Theory proposal must request a specific amount of funding (see Section 8.6.3) and must provide a narrative that describes the proposed use of the funds (see Section 9.7). Detailed budgets are not requested in Phase I, however, but are due in Phase II only (see Chapter 12 for details). Theoretical research should be the primary or sole emphasis of a Theory Proposal. Analysis of Archival data may be included, but should not be the main aim of the project. Funding for GO or AR proposals in which theoretical research is included but not predominant will remain appropriate under the normal GO or AR programs.
Only U.S. Investigators (as defined in Section 12.2) are eligible for funding of Theory Proposals.
A Theory Proposal may be submitted by a non-U.S. PI if there are one or more U.S. CoIs who request funding.
Award amounts for Theory Proposals are anticipated to be similar to those made for `Regular AR' proposals (see Section 3.4.1), for which the majority of the awards in recent cycles have been under $100,000, with a median around $50,000. For reference, 10 Theory proposals were approved in Cycle 12. However, STScI does allow the submission of more ambitious proposals for which larger amounts of funding may be justified.
Theory Proposals should be identified in the `Special Proposal Types' section of the proposal (see Section 8.10).
The `Scientific Justification' section of the proposal (see Section 9.1) should describe the proposed theoretical investigation and also its impact on observational investigations with HST. Review panels will consist of observational and theoretical astronomers with a broad range of scientific expertise (see Section 6.1.1). They will not necessarily have specialists in all areas of astrophysics, particularly theory, so the proposals must be written for general audiences of scientists. The `Analysis Plan' section of the proposal (see Section 9.6) should discuss the types of HST data that will benefit from the proposed investigation, and references to specific data sets in the HST Data Archive should be given where possible. This section should also describe how the results of the theoretical investigation will be made available to the astronomical community, and on what time scale the results are expected.
3.6 Calibration Proposals
HST is a complex observatory, with many possible combinations of observing modes and spectral elements on each instrument. Calibrations and calibration software are maintained by STScI for all of the most important and most used configurations. However, STScI does not have the resources to calibrate fully all potential capabilities of all instruments. On the other hand, the astronomical community has expressed interest in receiving support to perform calibrations for certain uncalibrated or poorly calibrated modes, or to develop specialized software for certain HST calibration and data reduction tasks. In recognition of this, STScI is encouraging outside users to submit proposals in the category of Calibration Proposals, which aims at filling in some of the gaps in our coverage of the calibration of HST and its instruments.
Successful proposers will be required to deliver documentation, and data products and/or software to STScI to support future observing programs.
Funding is available to support calibration proposals in the same manner as for normal science programs. However:
Calibration programs will be reviewed internally by the Instrument Division. The internal review will provide the TAC with an assessment of the feasibility of the proposal, how the proposal complements/extends the existing calibration program, and the type of science impacted by the proposed calibrations.
Note that a specific science program that has special calibration requirements is not a Calibration proposal; such a proposal should be submitted as a normal GO or SNAP proposal and the necessary calibration observations should be added to the science program as described in Section 4.3.
Investigators interested in the submission of a Calibration proposal are encouraged to study the Instrument Handbooks to determine the level at which STScI provides calibration and characterization, and to discuss ideas for extending these calibrations with STScI staff. Examples of the kinds of topics that have been addressed by calibration outsourcing programs of the type discussed here are:
- Calibration of faint photometric standards for WFPC2
- Creation of a coronagraphic PSF library for STIS/CCD
- Characterization of the spectroscopic PSF for STIS/CCD
- NICMOS polarimetric calibrations
- ACS photometric zero point verification
- Calibration of the ACS emission line filters
For a complete description of the instrument calibration plans/accuracies, and for other potential topics, please see the Scientific Instruments Web Page.
A Calibration Program can be a GO, SNAP or AR Program, and should fall in one of these categories. For GO and SNAP programs, the data obtained will be non-proprietary, as is the case for regular calibration observations. Proposers may request a proprietary period (which should be explained in the `Special Requirements' section of the proposal; see Section 9.3), but such a request will be subject to panel and TAC review and will be granted only in exceptional circumstances if exceedingly well justified. Archival Research proposals may be appropriate in cases where the necessary data have already been taken, or for programs that do not require specific data but aim to develop specialized software for certain HST calibration and data reduction tasks.
All proposers are strongly encouraged to contact the appropriate instrument group to discuss their program prior to submission.
Calibration Proposals must be identified in the `Special Proposal Types' section of the proposal (see Section 8.10).
3.7 Joint HST-Chandra Observing Proposals
If your science project requires observations from both HST and the Chandra X-ray Observatory, then you can submit a single proposal to request time on both Observatories to either the HST Cycle 13 or the Chandra Cycle 6 review. This avoids the "double jeopardy" of having to submit proposals to two separate reviews.
By agreement with the Chandra X-ray Center (CXC), STScI will be able to award up to 400 kiloseconds of Chandra observing time. Similarly the CXC will be able to award up to 100 orbits of HST time to highly rated proposals. The only criterion above and beyond the usual review criteria is that the project is fundamentally of a multi-wavelength nature, and that both sets of data are required to meet the science goals. It is not essential that the project requires simultaneous Chandra and HST observations. Chandra time will only be awarded in conjunction with HST observations (and should not be proposed for in conjunction with an Archival Research or Theory proposal).
Of the 400 kiloseconds of Chandra observing time that can be awarded in the HST review, only approximately 20% of the targets may be time-constrained. In addition, only one rapid TOO can be awarded (less than 30 days turn-around time). A Chandra TOO is defined as an interruption of a command load, which may include several predictable observations within that one-week load. HST Cycle 13 proposers should keep their Chandra requests within these limits.
Proposals for combined HST and Chandra observations should be submitted to the observatory that represents the prime science (not to both observatories). The Chandra Cycle 6 deadline is in March 2004. While there is multi-wavelength expertise in the review panels for both observatories, typically the HST panels will be stronger in IR/optical/UV science and the Chandra panels in X-ray science. Evaluation of the technical feasibility is the responsibility of the observer, who should review the Chandra documentation or consult with the CXC (see Section 9.4.1 for details). For proposals that are approved, the CXC will perform detailed feasibility checks in Chandra Cycle 6. The CXC reserves the right to reject any previously approved observation that proves to be non-feasible, impossible to schedule, and/or dangerous to the Chandra instruments. Any Chandra observations that prove infeasible or impossible could jeopardize the overall science program and may cause revocation of the corresponding HST observations.
Joint HST-Chandra proposals must be identified in the `Special Proposal Types' section of the proposal (see Section 8.10). Also, you must include technical information about the Chandra observations in the `Coordinated Observations' section of the proposal (see Section 9.4.1).
3.8 Joint HST-NOAO Observing Proposals
By agreement with the National Optical Astronomy Observatory (NOAO), STScI will be able to award time on NOAO facilities for highly ranked proposals that request time on both HST and NOAO telescopes. The award of time on NOAO facilities will be subject to approval by the NOAO Director, after nominal review by the NOAO TAC to avoid duplication of programs. The important additional criterion for the award of NOAO time is that both the HST and the ground-based data are required to meet the science goals of the project. It is not essential that the project requires simultaneous NOAO and HST observations. Under this agreement, NOAO time will only be awarded in conjunction with HST observations (and should not be proposed for in conjunction with an Archival Research or Theory proposal). Major results from these programs would be credited to NOAO and HST.
NOAO has offered up to 5% of its available time to proposals meeting the stated criteria. NOAO observing time will be implemented during the two semesters from August 2004 through July 2005. Time cannot be requested for the preceding semester, 2004A. Time may be requested only for those facilities listed on the NOAO/NASA Collaboration Web Page. Under this agreement approximately 15-20 nights per telescope per year will be available on most telescopes, with the following exceptions: only 1-2 nights will be available on the MMT and HET, and no time will be available on Gemini or Keck. In addition, time on the CCD Mosaic cameras or other heavily-subscribed resources may be limited by the NOAO Director.
Evaluation of the technical feasibility of the proposed ground-based observations is the responsibility of the observer, who should review the NOAO documentation or consult NOAO directly (see Section 9.4.2 for details). The proposal should include an explanation of how the requested exposure time was calculated. If approved for NOAO time, the PI must submit, by April 30, 2004, an NOAO Phase II form giving detailed observing information appropriate to the particular NOAO telescope and instrument. NOAO will perform feasibility checks, and NOAO reserves the right to reject any approved observation determined to be infeasible, impossible to schedule, and/or dangerous to the telescopes or instruments. Any NOAO observations that prove infeasible or impossible could jeopardize the overall science program and may cause revocation of the corresponding HST observations.
Joint HST-NOAO proposals must be identified in the `Special Proposal Types' section of the proposal (see Section 8.10). Also, you must include technical information about the NOAO observations in the `Coordinated Observations' section of the proposal (see Section 9.4.2).
3.9 Director's Discretionary (DD) Time Proposals
Up to 10% of the available HST observing time may be reserved for Director's Discretionary (DD) allocation. Scientists wishing to request DD time can do so at any time during the year, by using the APT. Instructions and updated information can be found on the DD web page.
Observations obtained as part of a DD program generally do not have a proprietary period, and are made available immediately to the astronomical community. However, DD proposers may request and justify proprietary periods in their proposals.
Upon receipt of a DD proposal, the STScI Director will usually seek advice on the scientific merit and technical feasibility of the proposal from STScI staff and outside specialists. A proposal for DD time might be appropriate in cases where an unexpected transient phenomenon occurs or when developments since the last proposal cycle make a time-critical observation necessary. Recognizing the limited lifetimes for major space facilities such as HST, Chandra and SIRTF, DD proposals for rapid follow-up of new discoveries will also be considered even if the astrophysics of the phenomena do not require such rapid follow-up. In such cases, the proposers must demonstrate that the observations will provide a critical link in the understanding of the phenomena and that carrying them out quickly is particularly important for planning future observations with major facilities. They should then also indicate their plans for quickly making the scientific community aware of their discoveries, to enable subsequent wider community follow-up.
DD observations should not generally be requested if any of the following is true:
- The observations could plausibly have been proposed for in the most recent regular proposal Cycle, possibly as a Target-of-Opportunity proposal (see Section 4.1.2).
- The observations were proposed for in a previous regular proposal Cycle, and were rejected.
- The proposed observations could wait until the next proposal Cycle with no significant reduction in the expected scientific return.
The primary criteria for acceptance of DD proposals are extremely high scientific merit and a strong demonstration of the urgency of the observations.
The HST observing schedule is determined eleven days in advance of the actual observations. Although it is technically feasible to interrupt the schedule and initiate observations of a new target, short-notice interruptions place severe demands on the planning and scheduling process, decreasing overall observing efficiency and delaying other programs. Hence, requests for DD time must be submitted at least two months before the date of the requested observations, if possible. Requests for shorter turn-around times must be exceedingly well justified. In the case that a DD time proposal with a turn-around time of less than one month is accepted, the PI or his/her designee is required to be reachable by STScI personnel on a 24 hour basis between the submission and the implementation of the program, for Phase II preparation.
Subject to availability of funds from NASA, STScI will provide financial support for U.S. PIs and CoIs of approved DD programs. Details of the STScI Funding Policies (including the definition of the term `U.S. Investigators') are outlined in Section 12.2. Please contact the STScI Grants Administration Office (see Appendix A.1) for more information about budget submissions for DD proposals using the Grants Management System.
3.10 Guaranteed Time Observer Programs
NASA has generally awarded a portion of the observing time in the years following the installation of a new instrument to those scientists involved in the development of this instrument. The interests of these Guaranteed Time Observers (GTOs) are protected through duplication policies, as described in Section 5.2.1.
|
|||||
|
Space Telescope Science Institute http://www.stsci.edu Voice: (410) 338-1082 help@stsci.edu |
